Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In law, ex parte (/ ɛ k s ˈ p ɑːr t eɪ,-iː /) is a Latin term meaning literally "from/out of the party/faction [1] of" (name of party/faction, often omitted), thus signifying "on behalf of (name)". An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.
In R v Medical Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Gilmore (1957), [6] the legality of the total ouster clause in section 36(3) of the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Act 1946 [10] was doubted by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, which issued a certiorari (which would today be called a quashing order) against the Medical Appeal Tribunal ...
inaudita altera parte: without hearing the other party Equivalent of common law ex parte, especially in the context of submitting a motion, brief, or obtaining relief as fast as possible incapax: incapable (Scots law) person not having capacity (mental, legal, or otherwise). [ɪnˈkapaks] indignus (heres) unworthy heir
Inter partes, Latin for 'between the parties', [1] is a law term that can be distinguished from in rem, which refers to a legal action whose jurisdiction is based on the control of property, or ex parte, which refers to a legal action that is by a single party.
Ex parte Merryman, 17 F. Cas. 144 (C.C.D. Md. 1861) (No. 9487), was a controversial U.S. federal court case that arose out of the American Civil War. [1] It was a test of the authority of the President to suspend "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus " under the Constitution's Suspension Clause , when Congress was in recess and therefore ...
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), is a United States Supreme Court case that allows suits in federal courts for injunctions against officials acting on behalf of states of the union to proceed despite the State's sovereign immunity, when the State acted contrary to any federal law or contrary to the Constitution. [1]
Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2 (1866), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled that the use of military tribunals to try civilians when civil courts are operating is unconstitutional.
Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942), was a case of the United States Supreme Court that during World War II upheld the jurisdiction of a United States military tribunal over the trial of eight German saboteurs, in the United States. [1]