Ads
related to: high court divisional 2 case brieflegal.thomsonreuters.com has been visited by 10K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The case first went to the Divisional Court, where Hooper LJ and Cresswell J decided in favour of Bancoult on 11 May 2006. The court found that the "interests of BIOT must be or must primarily be those whose right of abode and unrestricted right to enter and remain was being in effect removed", and that as Section 9 of the Constitutional Order ...
Hannah v. Peel, 1 K.B. 509, was a 1945 English legal case decided in the King's Bench Division of the High Court.The court held that the owner of the locus in quo does not have a superior right to possession over the finder of lost property that is unattached to the land.
Oxford v Moss (1979) is an English criminal law case, dealing with theft of intangible property: information.A divisional court of High Court, to whom the legal question of the taking of a proof (final draft) exam paper was referred by magistrates, and which is not one of binding precedent, ruled that information could not be deemed to be intangible property and therefore was incapable of ...
The High Court decision was met with mixed views in the daily press. The Daily Telegraph commented that the High Court ruling increased the prospect of an early general election, [50] while the Financial Times and The Guardian reported the case as a "blow" or a "setback" to the
A divisional court, in relation to the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, means a court sitting with at least two judges. [1] Matters heard by a divisional court include some criminal cases in the High Court (including appeals from magistrates' courts and in extradition proceedings) as well as certain judicial review cases.
R (Pinochet Ugarte) v Bow St Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate [2000] 1 AC 61, [1] 119 and 147 is a set of three UK constitutional law judgments by the House of Lords that examined whether former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet was entitled to claim state immunity from torture allegations made by a Spanish court and therefore avoid extradition to Spain.