Search for: "Stott v. United States"
Results 1 - 8
of 8
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2019, 8:44 am
Up until this case, that position had support in domestic law (see AL (Serbia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UKHL 42, [2008] 4 All ER 1127; R (Hooper) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2005] UKHL 29, [2006] 1 All ER 487; and R (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [2004] UKHL 39, [2004] 4 All ER 193). [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 2:47 am
The post Case Preview: Hook v British Airways and Stott v Thomas Cook appeared first on UKSC blog. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 1:34 am
This principle was famously laid down in the case of Sidhu v British Airways (where passengers could not sue at common law for harm resulting from their plane having been high jacked following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait), and subsequently applied by senior courts around the world, including notably the United States Supreme Court in El Al Israel Airlines v Tseng (though Justice Stevens there dissented). [read post]
16 Oct 2016, 8:00 pm
The development of class action law in in the employment context has been slower north of the 49th parallel than in the United States. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 6:50 am
Brown v Stott [2003] 1 AC 681, per Lord Steyn). [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 2:57 am
Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd, heard 20 November 2013. [read post]
7 May 2021, 12:53 pm
POA Authority and the "Clear Statement Rule"Timely ReferenceOnce again, and as described in Arredondo, the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has stepped in to tell state courts how the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) mandates that these courts construe instruments. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 6:00 pm
This devolution jurisdiction was first exercised by the Privy Council to rule on allegations of Convention rights violations by the prosecution in both solemn procedure (Montgomery v HMA 2001 SC (PC) 1, 19 October 2000) and summary criminal procedure (Brown v Stott 2001 SC (PC) 43, 5 December 2000). [read post]
