Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The case summaries below are not official or authoritative. Unless otherwise noted, cases were heard by a panel of 5 judges. Cases involving Scots law are highlighted in orange. Cases involving Northern Irish law are highlighted in green. List of judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom delivered in 2009
Both the majority and dissenting judgments in the case have been cited as persuasive precedent by various countries of the Commonwealth of Nations. However, in England itself, the courts have gradually retreated from the decision in Liversidge. It has been described as "an example of extreme judicial deference to executive decision-making, best ...
The Government had taken proper account of the UK's climate change commitments, including the Paris Agreement. Heathrow Airport may apply for planning permission for a third runway. [citation needed] Robinson (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 53: 16 December 2020 European Union Law
It was lawful for the government to have refused to hold a public inquiry into the murder of human rights lawyer but the fact that an appropriate inquiry had not taken place breached Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to life). [7] Konecny v District Court in Brno-Venkov, Czech Republic [2019] UKSC 8: 27 February
The court had to consider a number of matters in respect of an individual who had, together with his mother been granted indefinite leave to remain in the UK as a result of his mother having been persecuted by gang members in Jamaica but had subsequently committed criminal offences which would qualify the individual for deportation under the UK ...
Precedent in copyright law Wright v Tatham: 1838 132 E.R. 877 Hearsay: Dimes v Grand Junction Canal: 1852 3 HLC 759 A judge with a financial interest in one of the parties to a case is debarred from deciding a case involving that party; applying the principle "Nobody should be a judge in their own cause". Hyde v Hyde: 1866
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
The Appellants also argued, relying on the persuasive precedent of the Australian High Court case of Goodwin v Phillips (1908), that implied repeal could work pro tanto, that is to say a later act could carve out an exception to the operation of an earlier without prejudice to its operation in areas unaffected by the later statute. They also ...