Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-18-2012
Golan v. Holder NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus GOLAN etal. v. HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit No. 10545.Argued October 5, 2011Decided January 18, 2012 The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Berne), which took effect in 1886, is the principal accord governing international copyright relations. Bernes 164 member states agree to provide a minimum level of copyright protection and to treat authors from other member countries as well as they treat their own. Of central importance in this case, Article 18 of Ber...
Tag this Judgment!Court : UK Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-08-2012
LORD DYSON 1. Some time after 17.00 hrs on 20 April 2005, Melanie Rabone hanged herself from a tree in LymePark, Cheshire. She was 24 years of age and was the loved daughter of Mr and Mrs Rabone. At the time, she was on two days' home leave from Stepping Hill Hospital, Stockport where she was undergoing treatment for a depressive disorder as an informal patient (ie one who was not detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 ("the MHA")). She had been admitted to the hospital as an emergency following a suicide attempt. She was assessed by the hospital as a high risk of a further suicide attempt. Mr and Mrs Rabone have always maintained that the hospital authorities should not have allowed her home leave and that they were responsible for their daughter's tragic death. They started proceedings against the Pennine Care NHS Trust ("the trust") alleging negligence and breach of the right to life protected by article 2 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundame...
Tag this Judgment!Court : UK Supreme Court
Decided on : Jul-04-2012
LORD WALKER (with whom Lord Hope, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke and Lord Dyson agree) The issues 1. This appeal raises two issues as to the common law privilege against self-incrimination. The first issue is as to the meaning of the words "proceedings for infringement of rights pertaining to intellectual property" in section 72(2)(a) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 ("the 1981 Act"). The second issue is whether, on the footing that the appellant, Mr Glenn Mulcaire, would by complying with an order of Mann J made on 19 November 2010 tend to expose himself to criminal proceedings for conspiracy, such proceedings would or would not be for a related offence within the meaning of section 72(5) of the 1981 Act. The facts 2. These issues arise in the context of the interception of mobile phone messages, at present a topic of widespread interest and concern. The respondent, the claimant in the proceedings, is Ms Nicola Phillips. She worked for Max Clifford Associates ("MCA"), the corporate vehicle of M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-28-2012
Nat'l Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS etal. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit No. 11393.Argued March 26, 27, 28, 2012Decided June 28, 2012[ 1 ] In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in order to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance and decrease the cost of health care. One key provision is the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain minimum essential healt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-18-2012
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus CHRISTOPHER etal. v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP., dba GLAXOSMITHKLINE certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 11204.Argued April 16, 2012Decided June 18, 2012 The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires employers to pay employees overtime wages, see 29 U.S.C. 207(a), but this requirement does not apply with respect to workers employed in the capacity of outside salesman, 213(a)(1). Congress did not elaborate on the meaning of outside salesman, but it delegated authority to the Department of Labor (DOL) to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : UK Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-28-2012
LORD REED (with whom Lord Hope, Lady Hale, Lord Wilson and Lord Carnwath agree) 1. This appeal raises a question as to the effect of a commencement provision in a statute which provides that provisions "shall come into force" on a specified date, and a consequential question as to the effect of a provision conferring upon Ministers the power to make regulations, where the provisions which are subject to the commencement provision cannot come into effective operation unless such regulations have been made. The legislation 2. These questions arise in relation to the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 ("the 2003 Act"). The relevant substantive provisions are contained in Chapter 3 of Part 17, comprising sections 264 to 273. That Chapter is concerned with the detention of patients in conditions of excessive security. 3. Section 264 is headed "Detention in conditions of excessive security: state hospitals". It applies where a patient's detention in a state hospital is au...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-18-2012
Kappos v. Hyatt NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus KAPPOS, UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR, PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE v. HYATT certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the federal circuit No. 101219.Argued January 9, 2012Decided April 18, 2012 Under the Patent Act of 1952, if a Patent and Trade Office (PTO) examiner denies a patent application, 35 U.S.C. 131, the applicant may file an administrative appeal with the PTOs Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, 134. If the Board also denies the application, the applicant may appeal directly to the Court of Appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-18-2012
Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus MIMS v. ARROW FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit No. 101195.Argued November 28, 2011Decided January 18, 2012 Consumer complaints about abuses of telephone technologyfor example, computerized calls to private homesprompted Congress to pass the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA or Act), 47 U.S.C. 227. Congress determined that federal legislation was needed because telemarketers, by operating interstate, were escaping state-law prohibitions on intrusive nuisance calls...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-29-2012
Reported in : (2012)9SCC1; JT2012(8)SC4; 2012(4)KCCR271(SN); 2012AIRSCW4942; AIR2012SC3565; 2012(7)SCALE553
Aftab Alam, J.1. The appellant, Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab @ Abu Mujahid (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellant’ or as ‘Kasab’), who is a Pakistani national, has earned for himself five death penalties and an equal number of life terms in prison for committing multiple crimes of a horrendous kind in this country. Some of the major charges against him were: conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India; collecting arms with the intention of waging war against the Government of India; waging and abetting the waging of war against the Government of India; commission of terrorist acts; criminal conspiracy to commit murder; criminal conspiracy, common intention and abetment to commit murder; committing murder of a number of persons; attempt to murder with common intention; criminal conspiracy and abetment; abduction for murder; robbery/dacoity with an attempt to cause death or grievous hurt; and causing explosions punishable under the Explosive S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-31-2012
Reported in : (2013)1SCC1
K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.1. We are, in these appeals, primarily concerned with the powers of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short 'SEBI') under Section 55A(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 to administer various provisions relating to issue and transfer of securities to the public by listed companies or companies which intend to get their securities listed on any recognized stock exchange in India and also the question whether Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (for short 'OFCDs') offered by the appellants should have been listed on any recognized stock exchange in India, being Public Issue under Section 73 read with Section 60B and allied provisions of the Companies Act and whether they had violated the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Disclosure and Investor Protection) Guidelines, 2000 [for short 'DIP Guidelines'] and various regulations of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Re...
Tag this Judgment!