发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Essential Cases: Public Law最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
Case of Proclamations [1610] 77 ER 1352, 12 Co Rep 74, King’s Bench 公告案[1610]77 ER 1352, 12 Co Rep 74, King 's Bench
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0011
T. Webb
{"title":"Case of Proclamations [1610] 77 ER 1352, 12 Co Rep 74, King’s Bench","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Case of Proclamations [1610] 77 ER 1352 12 Co Rep 74, King’s Bench. This classic public law case concerned whether the King could rule by proclamation, or whether he was required to rule through Parliament. It provides one of the core foundations of the law limiting the scope of the royal prerogative today. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124387468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Re Finucane’s Application for Judicial Review [2019] UKSC 7, Supreme Court 关于芬努凯恩的司法审查申请[2019]UKSC 7，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0061
T. Webb
{"title":"Re Finucane’s Application for Judicial Review [2019] UKSC 7, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0061","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Re Finucane’s Application for Judicial Review [2019] UKSC 7, UK Supreme Court. This case concerns first, the law relating to legitimate expectations, and second the requirements to establish an Article 2-compliant investigation into a death. The facts of the case are connected to the murder of Patrick Finucane by loyalist paramilitaries in Northern Ireland. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123634604","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Osborn v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61, Supreme Court 奥斯本诉假释委员会[2013]UKSC 61，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0025
T. Webb
{"title":"Osborn v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0025","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Osborn v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61, Supreme Court. This case concerned three applicants who, it was contended, had been subject to procedurally unfair processes by the Parole Board. In arguing their cases they had primarily relied upon Article 5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The UKSC preferred the common law principle of procedural fairness. This case note examines that principle and the concept of common law rights more generally in relation to the ECHR and the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132901518","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Re Resolution to Amend the Constitution of Canada [1981] 1 SCR 753, also known as the Patriation Reference, Supreme Court of Canada 修订加拿大宪法的决议[1981]1 SCR 753，又称《加拿大最高法院归国参考》
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0062
T. Webb
{"title":"Re Resolution to Amend the Constitution of Canada [1981] 1 SCR 753, also known as the Patriation Reference, Supreme Court of Canada","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0062","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Re Resolution to Amend the Constitution of Canada [1981] 1 SCR 753, also known as the Patriation Reference, Supreme Court of Canada. This case considers the identification of constitutional conventions using the Jennings test, and the legal enforceability of conventions. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130559373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] AC 997, House of Lords 帕德菲尔德诉农业、渔业和食品部长[1968]AC 997，上议院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0026
T. Webb
{"title":"Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] AC 997, House of Lords","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0026","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] AC 997, House of Lords. This case is concerned with the scope and limits of ministerial discretion, and how, in the case of statutory powers, the courts determine this with reference to the intentions of Parliament and the objectives of the Act in question. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126850303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
The UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill—A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland [2018] UKSC 64, Supreme Court 联合王国退出欧盟(法律连续性)(苏格兰)法案-总检察长和苏格兰总检察长的参考资料[2018]UKSC 64，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0065
T. Webb
{"title":"The UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill—A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland [2018] UKSC 64, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0065","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in The UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill—A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland [2018] UKSC 64, Supreme Court. This case is concerned with the competencies of the Scottish Parliament, and the nature of devolution in the UK more generally. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125008495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27, House of Lords YL诉伯明翰市议会[2007]UKHL 27，上议院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0068
T. Webb
{"title":"YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27, House of Lords","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0068","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27, House of Lords. This case is concerned with the identification of public bodies and public functions under s. 6(3)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125111410","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Ireland v United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 EHRR 25, European Court of Human Rights 爱尔兰诉联合王国(1979- 1980)2 EHRR 25，欧洲人权法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0022
T. Webb
{"title":"Ireland v United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 EHRR 25, European Court of Human Rights","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0022","url":null,"abstract":"Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Ireland v United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 EHRR 25, European Court of Human Rights. This case concerned whether interrogation techniques employed by the United Kingdom in Northern Ireland between 1971 and 1975 amounted to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. More generally, the case note considers the differences between absolute, limited, and qualified rights. The case predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123415325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench 恩提克诉卡灵顿案[1765]95 ER 807, King 's Bench
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0017
T. Webb
{"title":"Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191926440.003.0017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench. This case concerned the legality of a warrant issued by one of the King’s Secretaries of State, the Earl of Halifax, which purported to authorize four of the King’s messengers to search for and take Entick’s papers and property. The case is a seminal judgment on the rule of law, the powers of government, and the nature of the legal system. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122720632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
R (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, Court of Appeal R(关于Abbasi的申请)诉外交和联邦事务国务秘书和内政部国务秘书[2002]EWCA Civ 1598，上诉法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191897689.003.0043
T. Webb
{"title":"R (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, Court of Appeal","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191897689.003.0043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191897689.003.0043","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Abbasi v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, before the Court of Appeal. This case concerned, among other things, whether foreign policy decisions made by the executive under the prerogative power could ever constitute justiciable matters arguable before the courts. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116767575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
下一页 尾页
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整，为了账户安全，请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们：info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务，方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号：604180095
Book学术官方微信