Remove Construction Remove Drafting Remove Statute Remove Tort
article thumbnail

Choice of law rules and statutory interpretation in the Ruby Princess Case in Australia

Conflict of Laws

Statute has left little of the common law untouched. The Interaction between a Mandatory Law and an Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause Statutes generally fall into one of three categories (see Maria Hook, ‘The “Statutist Trap” and Subject-Matter Jurisdiction’ (2017) 13(2) Journal of Private International Law 435).

Laws 59
article thumbnail

Supreme Court adds arbitration, Coastal Commission cases to its docket

At the Lectern

Two included separate explanatory statements: Three votes for review, and a dissenting statement, in juvenile coerced plea case Two votes for review, and a dissenting statement, in youth-offender LWOP no-parole case A third case concerned domestic violence torts. Domestic violence tort. Fee failure forfeit of arbitration.

Court 49
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

July 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The Court held that the provision used “extension” in its “temporal sense,” but that the statute did not impose a “continuity requirement” and instead allowed small refineries to apply for hardship extensions “at any time.” Among the inadequacies found by the court was Ecology’s failure to consider climate change in drafting the permits.

Court 46
article thumbnail

April 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

In Minnesota, the district court granted the State of Minnesota’s motion to remand its case, which asserts state law claims under common law and consumer protection statutes. s consumer protection statute. In February, the Ninth Circuit temporarily enjoined certain construction work for the duration of the appeal.

Court 117
article thumbnail

February 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

In a separate order, the court directed the parties to file supplemental briefs on eight issues related to the scope of authorized activities under the permit, separation of powers, and the developer’s authority to construct the pipeline without a permit if the president lacks authority to issue the cross-border permit. City of Oakland v.