Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services, 545 U.S. 967 (2005), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that decisions by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on how to regulate Internet service providers are eligible for Chevron deference, in which the judiciary defers to an administrative agency's expertise under its governing ...
"The man in the X case", unnamed at the time to protect X's identity, was named in 2002 as Sean O'Brien (b.1949/50). [3] In 1994 he was tried and convicted of defilement of a girl under 15 and sentenced to 14 years in prison, reduced on appeal to four years. [3] [4] He was released in 1997 and obtained a taxi driver's licence. [4]
Nkabinde J cited as authority the first case in which the Constitutional Court addressed section 35(3)(1) and its counterpart in respect of sentence, section 35(3)(n). In Veldman v Director of Public Prosecutions, Witwatersrand Local Division, the court held that the principle of legality is central to the rule of law under the Constitution ...
A constitutional court is a high court that deals primarily with constitutional law. Its main authority is to rule on whether laws that are challenged are in fact unconstitutional , i.e. whether they conflict with constitutionally established rules, rights, and freedoms, among other things.
The Constitutional Court acknowledged that it was a "hard and unpalatable fact" that Mr. Soobramoney could receive the treatment if he would have been wealthy. Its 2001 decision in Government v Grootboom , however, held the state to a much more rigorous standard for " reasonableness ," requiring that it give consideration to the needs of the ...
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States.It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that turn on questions of U.S. constitutional or federal law.
The court held, accordingly, that a declaratory order should be issued to substitute the High-Court order stipulating that section 26(2) of the Constitution required the state to act to meet the obligation imposed upon it to devise and implement a comprehensive and coordinated program to realise progressively the right of access to adequate ...
Two of the defendants, Mr Abulane Alpheus Tshabalala and Mr Annanius Ntuli, sought leave to appeal their convictions and sentences in the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court found jurisdiction in the case because of an existing uncertainty in South African criminal law about the proper application of the common purpose doctrine to ...