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
Talevski’s wife and legal guardian brought a Section 1983 action on his behalf against VCR, HHC, and other entities, alleging violations of his FNHRA rights. Staredecisis does not compel continued adherence to Section 1983 precedent, according to HHC. The district court dismissed the action, but the U.S.
The relevant statute , regulating disability benefits, provides that “the United States will pay [compensation] to any veteran” who is “disabled” as a result of (1) “personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty,” or (2) “aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty.”
This has immense significance regarding the security of contracts, enforcement of obligations, and overall predictability of solutions on these issues. The Supreme Court of Nigeria and the Judicature The Nigerian Supreme Court is necessary for the legal system’s stability, coherence, and sustainable evolution. [2]
The Supreme Court directly revisited the rule in Kimble, but ultimately chose to uphold the rule based on staredecisis. 29 (1987), the court noted that it could not reconsider the merits of an award even if the arbitrators made factual or legal errors in interpreting a contract. Misco , 484 U.S. ” Quoting W.R.
If that is so, as is indeed it is, how much less can parties by their private acts remove the jurisdiction properly and legally vested in our Courts ? 8] It should be stressed that Oputa JSC’s obiter dictum is not binding on lower courts according to the Nigerian common law doctrine of staredecisis.
Nigerian legal practitioners have had to provide legal advice and represent clients before trial and appellate courts as well as arbitral tribunals on disputes involving private international law questions within the context of Nigerian law. They do not know any better.
All three legal teams have cut it a little close, and in a departure from normal custom, they do not greet each other or shake hands. He emphasizes the Casey court’s discussion of staredecisis, reading from the opinion and even giving the page numbers in the United States Reports. Casey did that,” she replies. “No,
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