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
R (on the application of Begum (By her litigation friend, Rahman)) v Headteacher, Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15, House of Lords R(关于Begum(由她的诉讼朋友Rahman提出)诉denhigh High School的校长[2006]UKHL 15，上议院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0032
T. Webb
{"title":"R (on the application of Begum (By her litigation friend, Rahman)) v Headteacher, Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15, House of Lords","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0032","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 Begum (By her litigation friend, Rahman)) v Headteacher, Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15, House of Lords. This case concerned whether a school unlawfully limited a pupil’s right to manifest her religious beliefs through religious dress. The case note explores how a balance is struck between competing qualified rights, and so also contains discussion of the concept of proportionality. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134055257","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
British Railways Board v Pickin [1974] AC 765, House of Lords 英国铁路局诉皮克金[1974]AC 765，上议院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0007
T. Webb
{"title":"British Railways Board v Pickin [1974] AC 765, House of Lords","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0007","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 British Railways Board v Pickin [1974] AC 765, House of Lords. The case concerned the unwillingness of the courts to look behind the process by which statutes were enacted by Parliament. The case note explores the wider implications of this position in the context of debate between orthodox and alternative conceptions of parliamentary sovereignty, and the notion of constitutional statutes. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123655751","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
O’Brien v Ministry of Justice (formerly Department of Constitutional Affairs) [2013] UKSC 6, Supreme Court O 'Brien诉司法部(原宪法事务部)[2013]UKSC 6，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0017
T. Webb
{"title":"O’Brien v Ministry of Justice (formerly Department of Constitutional Affairs) [2013] UKSC 6, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0017","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 O’Brien v Ministry of Justice (formerly Department of Constitutional Affairs) [2013] UKSC 6, Supreme Court. This case considered whether part-time judges were entitled to judicial pensions, but more generally considers the extent to which judicial remuneration is constitutionally protected from political influence. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128323577","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 v Chaytor and others [2010] UKSC 52, Supreme Court R v Chaytor和其他人[2010]UKSC 52，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0021
T. Webb
{"title":"R v Chaytor and others [2010] UKSC 52, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0021","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 v Chaytor and others [2010] UKSC 52, Supreme Court. This case considered the extent of parliamentary privilege, and the courts' role in interpreting it. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128600538","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
R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd (No. 2) [1991] 1 AC 603, House of Lords R诉运输国务大臣，单方面因素有限公司(第2号)[1991]1 AC 603，上议院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0031
T. Webb
{"title":"R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd (No. 2) [1991] 1 AC 603, House of Lords","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0031","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 v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame Ltd (No. 2) [1991] 1 AC 603, House of Lords. This case explored whether a United Kingdom court could suspend the effect of primary legislation where it was in conflict with European Community law. It necessarily raises questions about the nature and limits (if any) of parliamentary sovereignty. 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":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132203192","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
Hirst v United Kingdom [2005] ECHR 681, European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber) 赫斯特诉英国案[2005]ECHR 681，欧洲人权法院(大法庭)
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0013
T. Webb
{"title":"Hirst v United Kingdom [2005] ECHR 681, European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber)","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0013","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 Hirst v United Kingdom [2005] ECHR 681, European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber). This case note concerns the provisions limiting the voting rights of prisoners, and the extent to which the United Kingdom is bound to follow the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"173 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114267335","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
Thoburn v Sunderland City Council [2002] EWHC 195 (Admin), Divisional Court 索伯恩诉桑德兰市议会[2002]EWHC 195(行政)，分区法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0044
T. Webb
{"title":"Thoburn v Sunderland City Council [2002] EWHC 195 (Admin), Divisional Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0044","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 Thoburn v Sunderland City Council [2002] EWHC 195 (Admin), Divisional Court. This case introduced the concept of a ‘constitutional’ statute into UK jurisprudence. The case note reflects on the consequences of this. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123100966","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
Dimes v Proprietors of the Grand Junction Canal (1852) III House of Lords Cases (Clark’s) 759, 10 ER 301, House of Lords Dimes诉大枢纽运河业主案(1852年)III上议院案件(克拉克案)759,10 ER 301，上议院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0011
T. Webb
{"title":"Dimes v Proprietors of the Grand Junction Canal (1852) III House of Lords Cases (Clark’s) 759, 10 ER 301, House of Lords","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780191842832.003.0011","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 Dimes v Proprietors of the Grand Junction Canal (1852) III House of Lords Cases (Clark’s) 759, 10 ER 301, House of Lords. This case concerns an example of a judge holding a pecuniary interest in a case they were adjudicating upon. There is also wider discussion of the concept of bias. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125320991","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 Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court R(关于隐私国际的应用)诉调查权法庭[2019]UKSC 22，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043
T. Webb
{"title":"R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043","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 Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court. This case revisited the legality of ouster clauses discussed in Anisminic ([1969] 2 AC 147) in the context of the reviewability of decisions made by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124360805","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
R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, Supreme Court R(关于UNISON的申请)诉大法官[2017]UKSC 51，最高法院
Essential Cases: Public Law Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0045
T. Webb
{"title":"R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, Supreme Court","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0045","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 UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, Supreme Court. This case considers whether the fees applicants were required to pay to access the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeals Tribunal interfered with their ability to access justice. The UKSC articulated the right of access to justice as deriving from the common law. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"02 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129174842","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
首页 上一页 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