Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Horne v. Department of Agriculture, 569 U.S. 513 (2013) ("Horne I"); 576 U.S. 351 (2015) ("Horne II"), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions regarding the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
It contains the fundamental conditions under which the company is allowed to operate. Until recent it had to include the "object clause" which made the shareholders, creditors and those dealing with the company know what is its permitted range of operation, although this was usually drafted very broadly. It also shows the company's initial capital.
Case history; Prior: Defendant's motion for stay to compel arbitration granted in district court; affirmed on appeal by Second Circuit; certiorari granted: Holding; Challenge to enforceability of contract must be decided by arbitrator when contract has arbitration clause unless challenge is to clause itself.
United States (312 F.2d 418 (Ct. Cl. 1963), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 954, 84 S.Ct. 444) is a 1963 United States Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) court case which has become known as the Christian Doctrine. The case held that standard clauses established by regulations may be considered as being in every Federal contract.
Case history; Prior: In re Atlantic Marine Construction Co., 701 F.3d 736 (5th Cir. 2012) Holding; A forum selection clause may be enforced by a motion to transfer under 28 U.S.C. 1404(a). When such a motion is filed, the district court should transfer the case except in limited and extraordinary circumstances. Court membership; Chief Justice ...
Commerce clause Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 3: Interstate Commerce Clause Navajo Freight Lines, Inc. , 359 U.S. 520 (1959), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Illinois law requiring trucks to have unique mudguards was unconstitutional under the Commerce clause .
J Spurling Ltd v Bradshaw [1956] EWCA Civ 3 is an English contract law and English property law case on exclusion clauses and bailment. It is best known for Denning LJ's "red hand rule" comment, where he said, I quite agree that the more unreasonable a clause is, the greater the notice which must be given of it.
Aluminium Industrie Vaasen BV was a Dutch supplier of aluminium foil.Romalpa Aluminium Ltd processed it in their factory. In the contract of sale, it said that ownership of the foil would only be transferred to Romalpa when the purchase price had been paid in full and products made from the foil should be kept by the buyers as bailees (the contract referring to the Dutch expression ...