enow.com Web Search

  1. Including results for

    whiteley v chappell summary

    Search only for whitely v chappel summary

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Plain meaning rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_meaning_rule

    However, use of the literal rule may defeat the intention of Parliament. For instance, in the case of Whiteley v. Chappel, [10] the court came to the reluctant conclusion that Whiteley could not be convicted of impersonating "any person entitled to vote" at an election, because the person he impersonated was dead. Using a literal construction ...

  3. Purposive approach - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purposive_approach

    The purposive approach (sometimes referred to as purposivism, [1] purposive construction, [2] purposive interpretation, [3] or the modern principle in construction) [4] is an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation under which common law courts interpret an enactment (a statute, part of a statute, or a clause of a constitution) within the context of the law's purpose.

  4. Impersonator - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impersonator

    In England and Wales, the Poor Law Amendment Act 1851, section 3, made it an offence to impersonate a "person entitled to vote" at an election.In the case of Whiteley v Chappell (1868), the literal rule of statutory interpretation was employed to find that a dead person was not a "person entitled to vote" and consequently a person accused of this offence was acquitted.

  5. Kyles v. Whitley - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyles_v._Whitley

    Kyles v. Whitley , 514 U.S. 419 (1995), is a United States Supreme Court case that held that a prosecutor has an affirmative duty to disclose evidence favorable to a defendant pursuant to Brady v.

  6. R v Whiteley - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Whiteley

    R v Whiteley (1991) 93 Cr App R 25 was an important case in the criminal law of England & Wales in relation to criminal damage. It established that for the purposes of the Criminal Damage Act 1971, [ 1 ] the property in question must be tangible but the damage done may be intangible. [ 2 ]

  7. Learoyd v Whiteley - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learoyd_v_Whiteley

    Elizabeth Whiteley and her children sued the executors of Benjamin Whiteley's will (of 19 March 1874). The will contained a power to invest the fund on certain investments, including “real securities in England or Wales.” £5000 of the trust money had been lost. £3000 was invested in a mortgage at 5% return in the freehold of a ten-acre brick field near Pontefract, “with the engine ...

  8. Nestle v National Westminster Bank plc - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestle_v_National...

    The classic statement is that of Lindley LJ (Re Whiteley (1886) 33 Ch D 347, 355): "The duty of a trustee is not to take such care only as a prudent man would take if he had only himself to consider, the duty rather is to take such care as an ordinary prudent man would take if he were minded to make an investment for the benefit of other people ...

  9. Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamb's_Chapel_v._Center...

    Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 508 U.S. 384 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning whether the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment was offended by a school district that refused to allow a church access to school premises to show films dealing with family and child-rearing issues faced by parents.