Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In law, a test is a commonly applied method of evaluation used to resolve matters of jurisprudence. [1] In the context of a trial , a hearing , discovery , or other kinds of legal proceedings , the resolution of certain questions of fact or law may hinge on the application of one or more legal tests.
Valid but illicit or valid but illegal (Latin: valida sed illicita) is a description applied in the Catholic Church to describe either an unauthorized celebration of a sacrament or an improperly placed juridic act that nevertheless has effect. Validity is presumed whenever an act is performed by a qualified person and includes those things ...
In most jurisdictions, courts routinely "blue pencil" or reform covenants that are deemed not reasonable. The blue pencil doctrine gives courts the authority to strike unreasonable clauses from a non-compete agreement, leaving the rest to be enforced, or actually to modify the agreement to reflect the terms that the parties originally could have and probably should have agreed to. [3]
Criminal illicit enrichment laws are those that are based in criminal procedure. They constitute a criminal offence, and can therefore result in a criminal punishment. An example of a criminal illicit enrichment law is the offence found in Section 10 of Hong Kong's Prevention of Briber Ordinance 1971. [21]
The exclusionary rule does not apply in a civil case, in a grand jury proceeding, or in a parole revocation hearing.. The law in force at the time of the police action, not the time of the attempt to introduce the evidence, controls whether the action is illegal for exclusionary rule purposes.
In criminal law, self-incrimination is the act of making a statement that exposes oneself to an accusation of criminal liability or prosecution. [1] Self-incrimination can occur either directly or indirectly: directly, by means of interrogation where information of a self-incriminatory nature is disclosed; or indirectly, when information of a self-incriminatory nature is disclosed voluntarily ...
Miller v. California sets the precedent as to what may constitute illegal obscenity generally under US law. [11] Dost only focused on the prong of the Miller test that deals specifically with appealing to the prurient interest. The other two prongs of the Miller test are whether or not the material violates contemporary community standards and ...
Thus, the courts of most states use a hybrid test of intent, combining both subjective and objective elements, for each offence changed. For intention in English law, section 8 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 provides the frame in which the mens rea is assessed. It states: