scholarly journals Liability for Obligations of a Capital Company in the Process of Formation under Article 13 § 1 of the Code of Commercial Partnerships and Companies: A Partly Critical Commentary on the Judgement of the Polish Supreme Court of 10 September 2020 (V CSK 118/19, LEX no. 3080092)

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 633-641
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Goldiszewicz
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Critical Commentary

scholarly journals Case Comment: Alister Anthony Pareira v. State of Maharashtra

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-95
Author(s):  
Joseph Alby
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Critical Commentary ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Drunken Driving ◽  
Indian Penal Code

Earlier, cases of drunken driving resulting in an accident were determined in accordance with sections 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Relatively lenient, these provisions warrant maximum punishments of imprisonment for 6 months and 2 years respectively. However the Supreme Court in Alister Anthony Pareira v. State of Maharashtra held that in a case where an allegation is raised regarding an accident being caused as a consequence of drunkenness, the investigating agency is bound to register the case under section of 304, IPC. Section 304 part II deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and imposes a punishment of 10 years rigorous imprisonment. As a result, drunken driving has now been made punishable under section 304 part II as well as under sections 337 and 338, which deal with injury caused by negligence. The objective of this study is to provide a critical commentary of the aforementioned judgment.

The Gay Cake Case: What the Supreme Court Did, and Didn’t, Decide in Ashers

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-270
Author(s):  
Christopher McCrudden
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Religious Expression ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Critical Commentary ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Moral Arguments ◽  
Normative Foundations ◽  
Individual Service

Abstract The Supreme Court got it right in the Ashers (‘Gay cake’) case. It decided correctly the important legal issues central to the case: the scope of indissociability; the scope of ‘associative’ discrimination in sexual orientation goods and services discrimination claims; whose characteristics are relevant for determining whether an action amounts to unlawful discrimination; and the extent of the protection which freedom of expression accords individual service providers and companies from ‘forced’ or ‘compelled’ political and religious expression. Much of the critical commentary that followed the case is overblown. In some respects, the case is somewhat less legally significant, and less legally controversial, than the commentary would suggest. Underlying some of the resistance to the decision is a sense that the Court should have manipulated the legal test of unlawful discrimination to reach a morally satisfying result. This is not how the Court should decide such cases, leading as it does to a severe rupture with the idea of legality and the Rule of Law. In any event, the three (moral) arguments that are drawn on—dignity, equality, and conscience-scepticism—are less helpful that might appear in addressing Ashers-type cases, and do not undermine the normative foundations of the Supreme Court's decision.

TIME LIMIT FOR FILING AN APPEAL IN CASSATION BY AN ATTORNEY BY CHOICE, IF THE ATTORNEY APPOINTED EX OFFICIO REFUSED PREPARING IT. CRITICAL COMMENTARY TO THE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT OF 23 JANUARY 2020, REF. NO. IV CZ 115/19

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (XX) ◽  
pp. 349-362
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Partyk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Time Limit ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Critical Commentary ◽  
The Supreme Court

The commented court decision of the Supreme Court refers to the issue of setting the time limit for filing an appeal in cassation if an attorney appointed for a party ex officio refused to file appeal in cassation, and then the complaint was filed by the party’s attorney of choice. The Supreme Court supported the position that in such a case, an attorney of choice may effectively file an appeal in cassation within the period open to the attorney appointed for a party ex officio. The commented judgment does not deserve to be approved of. Art. 124 § 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure should be interpreted strictly, since the party’s attorney by choice could have used the institution of reinstating a time limit regarding filing a cassation appeal.

Malpractice & Negligence: State Supreme Courts Limit Therapists’ Duties to Third Parties

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-205
Author(s):  
Megan Cleary
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Child Sexual Abuse ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
New Hampshire ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Recovered Memories ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Repressed Memory ◽  
University Of Colorado

In recent years, the law in the area of recovered memories in child sexual abuse cases has developed rapidly. See J.K. Murray, “Repression, Memory & Suggestibility: A Call for Limitations on the Admissibility of Repressed Memory Testimony in Abuse Trials,” University of Colorado Law Review, 66 (1995): 477-522, at 479. Three cases have defined the scope of liability to third parties. The cases, decided within six months of each other, all involved lawsuits by third parties against therapists, based on treatment in which the patients recovered memories of sexual abuse. The New Hampshire Supreme Court, in Hungerford v. Jones, 722 A.2d 478 (N.H. 1998), allowed such a claim to survive, while the supreme courts in Iowa, in J.A.H. v. Wadle & Associates, 589 N.W.2d 256 (Iowa 1999), and California, in Eear v. Sills, 82 Cal. Rptr. 281 (1991), rejected lawsuits brought by nonpatients for professional liability.

Malpractice & Negligence: Cal. Supreme Court Clarifies Negligence Provisions under State’s Elder Abuse Act

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-203
Author(s):  
Kendra Carlson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Elder Abuse ◽  
Skilled Nursing Facility ◽  
Pressure Sores ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Nursing Facility ◽  
Skilled Nursing ◽  
The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of California held, in Delaney v. Baker, 82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 610 (1999), that the heightened remedies available under the Elder Abuse Act (Act), Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 15657,15657.2 (West 1998), apply to health care providers who engage in reckless neglect of an elder adult. The court interpreted two sections of the Act: (1) section 15657, which provides for enhanced remedies for reckless neglect; and (2) section 15657.2, which limits recovery for actions based on “professional negligence.” The court held that reckless neglect is distinct from professional negligence and therefore the restrictions on remedies against health care providers for professional negligence are inapplicable.Kay Delaney sued Meadowood, a skilled nursing facility (SNF), after a resident, her mother, died. Evidence at trial indicated that Rose Wallien, the decedent, was left lying in her own urine and feces for extended periods of time and had stage I11 and IV pressure sores on her ankles, feet, and buttocks at the time of her death.

Antitrust: U.S. Supreme Court Affirms FTC Jurisdiction but Vacates Scope of Analysis on CDA Policy

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-198
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Zakhary
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Trade Commission ◽  
Ninth Circuit ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Antitrust Analysis ◽  
Business Financing ◽  
The U.S

In California Dental Association v. FTC, 119 S. Ct. 1604 (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that a nonprofit affiliation of dentists violated section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C.A. § 45 (1998), which prohibits unfair competition. The Court examined two issues: (1) the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) jurisdiction over the California Dental Association (CDA); and (2) the proper scope of antitrust analysis. The Court unanimously held that CDA was subject to FTC's jurisdiction, but split 5-4 in its finding that the district court's use of abbreviated rule-of-reason analysis was inappropriate.CDA is a voluntary, nonprofit association of local dental societies. It boasts approximately 19,000 members, who constitute roughly threequarters of the dentists practicing in California. Although a nonprofit, CDA includes for-profit subsidiaries that financially benefit CDA members. CDA gives its members access to insurance and business financing, and lobbies and litigates on their behalf. Members also benefit from CDA marketing and public relations campaigns.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document