Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart [1992] UKHL 3, is a landmark decision of the House of Lords on the use of legislative history in statutory interpretation.The court established the principle that when primary legislation is ambiguous then, in certain circumstances, the court may refer to statements made in the House of Commons or House of Lords in an attempt to interpret the meaning of the ...
Peter Hart (11 November 1963 – 22 July 2010) was a Canadian historian, ... Brian Murphy queried apparent suppression of evidence contradicting Hart's conclusion ...
Hart grew up in Stanhope and Barton-under-Needwood.He attended school in Chesterfield, Derbyshire (1967–73) and Liverpool University (1973–76). He then undertook a post-graduate teaching course at Crewe & Alsager College (1976–77), and lastly a post-graduate librarianship at Liverpool Polytechnic (1979–80).
For evidence to be admissible, it must tend to prove or disprove some fact at issue in the proceeding. [2] However, if the utility of this evidence is outweighed by its tendency to cause the fact finder to disapprove of the party it is introduced against for some unrelated reason, it is not admissible.
Gates Rubber Company v. Bando Chemical Industries, Ltd., et al. [1] is a decision by the U.S. district court for the District of Colorado from May 1, 1996. It is considered a landmark decision [2] in terms of expert witness court testimony in questions of electronic evidence [3] and digital forensics.
In United States federal law, the Daubert standard is a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony.A party may raise a Daubert motion, a special motion in limine raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury.
According to the SEC, Stewart tampered with a piece of evidence, editing the contents of an incriminating message regarding her ImClone insider trading. Stewart and Bacanovic pleaded not guilty.
United States v Burns [2001] 1 S.C.R. 283, 2001 SCC 7, was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that found that extradition of individuals to countries in which they may face the death penalty is a breach of fundamental justice under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.