This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In Maska the 1st claimant/respondent instituted an action for summary judgment against the defendant/appellant and the 2nd respondent at the High Court of Katsina State for breach of contract. On this basis the defendant/appellant argued that the court of Yobe State had exclusive jurisdiction.
The complaint asserted four causes of action relating to the legality of New York’s participation in RGGI. The fourth cause of action raised the question of whether RGGI violates the Compact Clause as a multistate contract not authorized by Congress. The complete courtdecision is available here.
One may wonder whether the Kentucky Court agrees with this assessment – that a foreign court’s injunction restraining enforcement of its judgment effectively amounts to an act of comity.
The conferences topic, characterisation, is the process for identifying the nature or category of a particular cause of action (for instance contractual, tortious, proprietary, corporate, matrimonial), so that the correct connecting factor can be employed which then points to the applicable law or to the competent court.
Writing on the importance of a private international law system that responds to the interests of Africa, Dr Okoli observed that with growing international trade with Africa comes an inevitable rise in disputes among contracting parties conducting trade on the continent. [4]
It claims economic damages from being “falsely and horrifically associated with the repulsive and deeply disturbing subject of the courtdecision.” The filing does not expressly name a cause of action beyond saying that the campaign was “inexplicable,” “malevolent, or at the very least, extraordinarily reckless.”.
It concluded that the appropriate forum to resolve the custody dispute is the Family Court, where proceedings were already pending. Ys arguments include among others the following point: (i) The cause of action in casu arose in Japan, where the children were born and raised. 233 of 2022 of 13 February 2022.
The Ninth Circuit said the new issuance of NWP 12 rendered the appeals moot and ordered the district court to dismiss the underlying claim. The Ninth Circuit declined, however, to take a position on whether the underlying cases were moot in their entirety and also declined to vacate any district courtdecisions.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content