Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (c. 31) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that significantly reformed the common law doctrine of privity and "thereby [removed] one of the most universally disliked and criticised blots on the legal landscape". [2]
Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the issue of whether a warrantless search conducted pursuant to third party consent violates the Fourth Amendment when the third party does not actually possess common authority over the premises.
The Supreme Court remanded Miller's case back to the Fifth Circuit. Justice William J. Brennan Jr. dissented, identifying that a similar case, Burrows v. Superior Court , [ 5 ] had been decided in the California Supreme Court that ruled that bank records were protected under the Fourth Amendment, in a manner consistent with California Bankers ...
"The Law Commission directly rejected the suggestion that the promisor should have every defence in a dispute with a third party that he would have in a dispute with the promisee (regardless of if it can be applied to the disputed term)."
Third party standing is a term of the law of civil procedure that describes when one party may file a lawsuit or assert a defense in which the rights of third parties are asserted. In the United States , this is generally prohibited, as a party can only assert his or her own rights and cannot raise the claims of right of a third party who is ...
Jus tertii (English: rights of a third party/ stranger) is a term for the legal argument by which a person can defend a claim made against them by invoking the rights of a stranger to the dispute. The defence asserts that the rights of the stranger are superior to those of the claimant; in other words the defence is that the claimant has ...
If a case is not reported in the Law Reports, the next best report is the Weekly Law Reports (e.g. [2002] 2 WLR 1315), and then the All England Reports (e.g., [2002] 2 All ER 865). In some situations, it might be preferable to cite a specialist series, e.g., Rottman v MPC was also cited in the Human Rights Law Reports, at [2002] HRLR 32.
The third-party doctrine is a United States legal doctrine that holds that people who voluntarily give information to third parties—such as banks, phone companies, internet service providers (ISPs), and e-mail servers—have "no reasonable expectation of privacy" in that information.