Footnote 33 Another leading case, Arnold v Britton,Footnote 34 presented the Supreme Court with the opportunity to return to the theme of legal interpretation and approach favoured by Lord Hoffman. In a key-passage of the judgment, the Court quoted Lord Hoffmann’s remarks in Chartbrook Ltd v ...
My situation is very similar – loans first taken out in August 2010. Still living in the unknown but I applied for IBR (eligible for OLD IBR) on 11/8/24 but applications are not being processed so when they say PAYE is now reopen, what does that mean? I was in this one prior to...
The stance of the Court changed in the case ofDB Modak v. Eastern Book Company. In this case, the appellant was the publisher of a well-known journal known as Supreme Court Cases. The respondents, in this case, launched a software program which contained notes from the SCC. They were ...
A prosecutor isa lawyer who works for a state or government organizationand is responsible for starting legal proceedings and then proving in court that the suspect committed the crime he's accused of. The opposite of a prosecutor is a defense attorney. What does it mean to be time barred?
The court affirmed the lower court's decision in the case, upholding the verdict. The appeal was denied, and the court affirmed the ruling, stating that the appellant's arguments did not have merit. Legal Terms Similar to Affirm Confirm: Confirm refers to validating or verifying the authenticit...
Oldest known ruling against Craig Wright. Mind you, this is ‘criminal’ contempt of court as civil cases don’t end up in imprisonment. “The further evidence was essentially directed to an email apparently sent by the appellantto Mr David Spencer of RIC at 11.23 am on 10 September 2003 ...
There are almost always bad facts that you need to address; it is best to do that before the other side does. For example, on the odd chance your client-say, a tobacco company-has actually done something wrong, it may actually have to apologize. Oh, I don’t mean one of those apolo...
“[W]hen Congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another[,] . . . this Court presumes that Congress intended a difference in meaning.” “Legislative history is of course not the law, but that does not mean it cannot aid us in our unde...
“Israel” was denied by the District Court by providing arguments raised to oppose to the appellant’s premises. The Supreme Court denies the fundamental premise that there is an Israeli nationality. In addition, Justice Melzer states that what the appellants maintain in their arguments that ...
And if you're in appellant and you're trying to get a decision below, whether it's at the district court or at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, if you're trying to get that turned around, that's the worst thing that can happen is you get a Rule 36 affirmance because it means...