Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In India, landmark court decisions come most frequently from the Supreme Court of India, which is the highest judicial body in India. High courts of India may also make such decisions, particularly if the Supreme Court chooses not to review the case or if it adopts the holding of the lower court.
Res judicata provides that once a case has been determined, it produces a judgment either inter partes or in rem depending on the subject matter of the dispute: although there can be an appeal on the merits, neither party can recommence proceedings on the same set of facts in another court. If that rule were not in place, litigation might never ...
Angelo Gambiglioni, De re iudicata, 1579 Res judicata or res iudicata, also known as claim preclusion, is the Latin term for judged matter, [1] and refers to either of two concepts in common law civil procedure: a case in which there has been a final judgment and that is no longer subject to appeal; and the legal doctrine meant to bar (or preclude) relitigation of a claim between the same parties.
"Leading case" is commonly used in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth jurisdictions instead of "landmark case", as used in the United States. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] In Commonwealth countries, a reported decision is said to be a leading decision when it has come to be generally regarded as settling the law of the question involved.
res judicata: a matter judged A matter that has been finally adjudicated, meaning no further appeals or legal actions by the involved parties is now possible. / ˈ r iː z dʒ uː d ɪ ˈ k eɪ t ə, ˈ r eɪ z, dʒ uː d ɪ ˈ k ɑː t ə / res nova: a new thing
When the lawsuit is finally resolved, or the allotted time to appeal has expired, the matter is res judicata, meaning the plaintiff may not bring another action based on the same claim again. In addition, other parties who later attempt to re-litigate a matter already ruled on in a previous lawsuit will be estopped from doing so.
Congress violates the separation of powers principle when it orders federal courts to reopen their final judgments. Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998) The Line Item Veto Act is unconstitutional because it allows the President to amend or repeal parts of statutes without the pre-approval of Congress.
In the United Kingdom when it was a member state, res judicata was in the strong sense: a previous ECJ ruling would bind of its courts: s 3(1) European Communities Act 1972. In the context of a reference for a preliminary ruling concerning validity, if the European instrument is declared invalid, all of the instruments adopted based on it are ...