enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Oposa v. Factoran - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oposa_v._Factoran

    Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, 224 S.C.R.A. 792 (1993), alternatively titled Minors Oposa v.Factoran or Minors Oposa, is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines recognizing the doctrine of intergenerational responsibility on the environment in the Philippine legal system.

  3. List of landmark court decisions in India - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    Judgement Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [22] 1978 A 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable. A law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of the Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. This judgement thus overruled A. K. Gopalan v.

  4. Lists of landmark court decisions - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_landmark_court...

    "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.

  5. Prathiba M. Singh - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prathiba_M._Singh

    Prathiba Maninder Singh (born 20 July 1968) is a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court, in India. [1] She has made significant contributions to academic literature and legal developments in Indian intellectual property law, as a practicing lawyer, and as an advisor to several legislative committees concerned with drafting related legislation.

  6. Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suresh_Kumar_Koushal_v...

    Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr. v. NAZ Foundation & Ors. (2013) is a case in which a 2 judge Supreme Court bench consisting of G. S. Singhvi and S. J. Mukhopadhaya overturned the Delhi High Court case Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and reinstated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.

  7. Vallejos v Commissioner of Registration - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallejos_v_Commissioner_of...

    Throughout the rest of October and November, Lam heard arguments and delivered judgments in two further FDH residence cases, namely Irene R. Domingo and Daniel L. Domingo v. Commissioner of Registration (HCAL 127 and 128/2010) and Josephine B. Gutierrez and Joseph James Gutierrez v. Commissioner of Registration (HCAL 136 and 137/2010). [12]

  8. Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naz_Foundation_v._Govt._of...

    Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009) [1] is a landmark Indian case decided by a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court, which held that treating consensual homosexual sex between adults as a crime is a violation of fundamental rights protected by India's Constitution. The verdict resulted in the decriminalization of homosexual acts ...

  9. Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amar_Nath_Sehgal_v._Union...

    The plaintiff, Amar Nath Sehgal is a renowned artist and sculptor, who created a mural in the lobby of Vigyan Bhawan, Delhi on the direction of appropriate authority. In the year 1957, the Government of India commissioned Mr. Sehgal for creating a bronze mural for Vigyan Bhavan, the most prominent International Convention Hall in Delhi.