Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The doctrine is considered by some to be an application of sovereign immunity to areas of law concerning statutes of limitations. [4] While the two doctrines are often linked as concepts, and are considered by some jurisdictions to be intertwined in policy and practice, there is a debate on whether the two doctrines are actually related. [1]
A civil statute of limitations applies to a non-criminal legal action, including a tort or contract case. If the statute of limitations expires before a lawsuit is filed, the defendant may raise the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense to seek dismissal of the claim. The exact time period depends on both the state and the type of ...
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.
Traffic law in the Philippines consists of multiple laws that govern the regulation and management of road transportation and the conduct of road users within the country. The official and latest traffic code of the Philippines is Republic Act No. 4136, also known as the "Land Transportation and Traffic Code", which was enacted into law on June ...
Sovereign immunity, or crown immunity, is a legal doctrine whereby a sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution, strictly speaking in modern texts in its own courts. State immunity is a similar, stronger doctrine, that applies to foreign courts.
Speed limits in the Philippines are specified in Republic Act No. 4136, or the Land Transportation and Traffic Code of the Philippines, which took effect on its approval on June 20, 1964. [1] The act covers a number of areas other areas than speed limits, and was amended regarding some of those areas by Republic Act No. 10930, which was ...
A borrowing statute, is a statute under which a U.S. state may "borrow" a shorter statute of limitations for a cause of action arising in another jurisdiction. The purpose of borrowing statutes is to prevent plaintiffs from engaging in forum shopping in order to find the longest available statute of limitations.
The court relied on the doctrine of in pari materia in holding that the mere "temporary control" of the car was enough under the statue. [ 19 ] On the other hand, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court cited the rule in Commonwealth v.