Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In law, ex parte (/ ɛ k s ˈ p ɑːr t eɪ,-iː /) is a Latin term meaning literally "from/out of the party/faction [1] of" (name of party/faction, often omitted), thus signifying "on behalf of (name)". An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.
In law, inter partes (Law Latin for 'between the parties' [1]) is a legal term that can be distinguished from in rem, which refers to a legal action whose jurisdiction is based on the control of property, or ex parte, which refers to a legal action that is by a single party.
inaudita altera parte: without hearing the other party Equivalent of common law ex parte, especially in the context of submitting a motion, brief, or obtaining relief as fast as possible incapax: incapable (Scots law) person not having capacity (mental, legal, or otherwise). [ɪnˈkapaks] indignus (heres) unworthy heir
In R v Medical Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Gilmore (1957), [6] the legality of the total ouster clause in section 36(3) of the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Act 1946 [10] was doubted by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, which issued a certiorari (which would today be called a quashing order) against the Medical Appeal Tribunal ...
The order is named after the 1975 English case of Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Limited, dealing with the theft of trade secrets, [1] although the first reported such order was granted by Templeman J earlier that year. [2] They are now formally known as search orders in England and Wales, [3] New Zealand, [4] Australia, [5] and ...
Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506 (1869), was a United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that Congress has the authority to withdraw the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction to review decisions of lower courts at any time. [1] The entirety of the Court's appellate jurisdiction is determined by federal law. [2]
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), is a United States Supreme Court case that allows suits in federal courts for injunctions against officials acting on behalf of states of the union to proceed despite the State's sovereign immunity, when the State acted contrary to any federal law or contrary to the Constitution. [1]
Ex parte Grossman, 267 U.S. 87 (1925), was a US Supreme Court case that held that the US President may pardon criminal contempt of court. [1] [2] Grossman had been convicted of criminal contempt but was pardoned by the President. The district court subsequently sent him back to prison.