Search for: "State v. Owusu" Results 1 - 20 of 40
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 May 2013, 6:08 am
Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion in Owusu-Ansah v. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 10:00 am by Karen Tani
Hugh’s College, University of Oxford; Global Professor of Law, NYU School of Law "Equity, banking, and the seeds of crisis: Foley v Hill (1838-48)"  October 11 Brittany Farr, Assistant Professor of Law, NYU School of Law "The Other Walker-Thomas: Reading Race in Contracts"  October 25 Shaun Ossei-Owusu, Presidential Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School "Social Engineers on a Grand Scale? [read post]
23 Nov 2013, 4:30 am by Karen Tani
From Chicago to Santiago: The Formation and Impact of the ‘Chicago Boys and Girls’Robert Van Horn, "Corporate Funders, Edward Levi, and the Rise of Chicago Law and Economics in the 1950s"Paul V. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 4:51 pm by INFORRM
The appeal Mr Kennedy appealed, arguing that the availability of forum non conveniens arguments was restricted where the Brussels Recast Regulation 2012/2015 (“Regulation”) applied and, further, that judicial discretion under section 49 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 was now heavily restricted, by virtue of the decision in Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 12:50 am
Judgments of Irish Courts The High Court considered the doctrine of forum non conveniens and lis pendens (including the decision in Owusu) and held that, under the Brussels I Regulation, as and between Member States, a strict application of the doctrine of  lis pendens  applies. [read post]
12 Aug 2009, 2:52 am
The present case concerned a number of applications to stay the English proceedings by Mr Lewinsohn on the grounds of forum non conveniens, with particular emphasis on the fact that there existed corresponding proceedings on the same issues in Utah.In refusing to stay the English proceedings, Mr Justice Barling held that the ECJ's decision in Owusu v Jackson (C-281/02) (2005) QB 801 ECJ applied even in circumstances where there was a prior action underway in a non-EU… [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 5:06 pm by INFORRM
 Because the English Court had jurisdiction over the defendant it has no power to stay proceedings on the grounds of forum non conveniens (see Owusu v Jackson [2005] 1 QB 801, ECJ). [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 8:20 am by Marta Requejo
He noted that Skype’s argument that there was no discretion to stay the UK proceedings was founded on Owusu, where the ECJ drew no distinction between Member and non-Member States. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 12:40 am by Dr. Stuart Baran
On #1, it was held by the Court of Appeal that the result of that decision was not to confer extra-EU jurisdiction, but merely to uphold judicial co-operation between European member states’ courts. [read post]
28 Dec 2020, 4:31 pm by INFORRM
Owusu (2005) concerned proceedings for breach of contract and negligence brought in England by an English-domiciled claimant in respect of a very serious injury he had suffered in a diving accident which occurred at a holiday resort in Jamaica. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 4:11 pm by INFORRM
Forum non conveniens The Claimant relied on EU case law (Owusu v Jackson (C-281/2002) and Maletic v lastminute.com GmbH (C-478-12)) to argue that the court was precluded from considering forum non conveniens issues. [read post]
18 Oct 2017, 2:22 am by Giesela Ruehl
Vedanta has focused their argument on the fact that Article 4 of the Brussels I Regulation Recast does not automatically allow an English-domiciled parent company to be sued in England and, despite the CJEU’s ruling in Owusu v Jackson, there is always discretion as to whether the English court should allow the claims to be tried in England. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 8:42 am
  The judgment goes through the background of licensing in the SEP area, quoting from the Court of Appeal's judgment in Unwired Planet, and explained briefly the wider fight between the companies, which includes proceedings commenced in China by Huawei China and ZTE China against Conversant seeking to invalidate Conversant's Chinese patents and seeking a FRAND determination.Jurisdiction over UK defendantsThe Court addressed the position as against the two UK domiciled appellants,… [read post]
29 Dec 2020, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
The rule in Diamond v Sutton, if it exists, would require the English courts with effect from 1 January 2021 to adopt a position fundamentally at variance with the Brussels Regime and the rationale of the judgments in Owusu, eDate Advertising and Bolagsupplysningen. [read post]