Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Landmark court decisions in India substantially change the interpretation of existing law. Such a landmark decision may settle the law in more than one way. In present-day common law legal systems it may do so by: [1] [2] Establishing a significant new legal principle or concept;
Landmark court decisions, in present-day common law legal systems, establish precedents that determine a significant new legal principle or concept, or otherwise substantially affect the interpretation of existing law. "Leading case" is commonly used in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth jurisdictions instead of "landmark case", as used ...
This is a list of grammatical cases as they are used by various inflectional languages that have declension. This list will mark the case, when it is used, an example ...
While, legal rights for the queer community in India have been expanding over the past decade, mostly as a result of the Supreme Court’s intervention, the latest ruling leaves Taiwan and Nepal ...
In Nepali the locus of grammatical function or "case-marking" lies within a system of agglutinative suffixes or particles known as postpositions, which parallel English's prepositions. There is a number of such one-word primary postpositions: ko – genitive marker; variably declinable in the manner of an adjective.
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014) is a landmark judgement of the Supreme Court of India, which declared transgender people the 'third gender', affirmed that the fundamental rights granted under the Constitution of India will be equally applicable to them, and gave them the right to self-identification of their gender as male, female or third gender.
S. Vinodkumar v. Union of India 1996 6 SCC 580: It is not permissible to relax standards of evaluation in matters of reservation in promotion By the Constitution (82nd) Amendment Act a proviso was inserted at the end of Art 335. M. Nagraj & Others v. Union of India and Others (AIR 2007 SC 71) held the amendments constitutional. Suraj Bhan Meena v.
Union of India & Others is a landmark decision by a two-judge bench of the Indian Supreme Court on the issue of whether Novartis could patent Gleevec in India, and was the culmination of a seven-year-long litigation fought by Novartis. The Supreme Court upheld the Indian patent office's rejection of the patent application.