Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Text of the Treasure Act 1996 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk. The Treasure Act 1996 is a UK Act of Parliament , defining which objects are classified as treasure, legally obliging the finder to report their find.
A coroner must summon a jury for an inquest if the death was not a result of natural causes and occurred when the deceased was in state custody (for example in prison, police custody, or whilst detained under the Mental Health Act 1983); or if it was the result of an act or omission of a police officer; or if it was a result of a notifiable accident, poisoning or disease. [5]
A treasure trove is an amount of money or coin, gold, silver, plate, or bullion found hidden underground or in places such as cellars or attics, where the treasure seems old enough for it to be presumed that the true owner is dead and the heirs undiscoverable.
Some states have rejected the American common law and hold that treasure trove belongs to the owner of the property in which the treasure trove was found. These courts reason that the American common law rule encourages trespass. Under the traditional English common law, treasure trove belongs to the Crown, though the finder may be paid a reward.
A judge also agreed to delay the Hidden Hills woman's sentencing for her double-murder conviction by an additional two months, setting a date of June 10.
Magistrates have the power to send any offence triable either way to the Crown Court but, even if they elect to try the case themselves, the accused retains the right to elect for a Crown Court trial with a jury. [5] Summary offences are tried by magistrates and there is no right of Crown Court trial by jury. During the 21st century some ...
The Senior Courts of England and Wales were originally created by the Judicature Acts as the "Supreme Court of Judicature". It was renamed the "Supreme Court of England and Wales" in 1981, [8] and again to the "Senior Courts of England and Wales" by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (to distinguish it from the new Supreme Court of the United Kingdom).
The jury, in Delaware, agreed with Apple that previous iterations of Masimo's W1 and Freedom watches and chargers willfully violated Apple's patent rights in smartwatch designs.