Not exact matches
Using Pakistan as a
case study, this article analyzes the ongoing debate and
concludes that while there is merit to
arguments on both sides, prudent policy recommendations for the governance of the United States» covert drone program fall somewhere
in between.
The seven - member Court of Appeals heard oral
arguments yesterday
in two
cases where a midlevel appellate court unanimously
concluded last year that state oil and gas law doesn't trump the authority of local governments to control land use.
The Judge hearing the
case concluded that the restrictive covenant
in question was «manifestly too wide» and that the
arguments advanced by A via its lawyers were simply «wrong».
This
argument was not made by any of the parties
in this
case and the Advocate - General used the international law
argument to
conclude that EU - law was not applicable at all, whereas the CJEU —
in my view — stays quite cryptic about how to fit
in the interplay between EU - law and international law
in its framework / criteria of judging free movement
cases.
The Court, secondly, and
in line with settled
case - law, refuted the
argument that the request was inadmissible because the EU itself was not a party to the Convention, because the request was made to clarify the competence of the EU, not the legal obstacles the EU may face
in concluding international agreements (this can be done through the Member States, paras 43 - 44).
Although on the facts of the
case, the Court
concluded that the part - time income received from Sobeys did not rise to a sufficient level to make it a substitute for her work at PJ — M2R Restaurant Inc., it raised the possibility that such an
argument could be made
in the appropriate
case.
The Court of Appeal
concludes that
arguments advanced by the Applicant
in support of re-arguing the
case are collateral to the decision made on enforceability.
In Nyembo v. Refugee Appeals Tribunal, 2007 IESC 25, the applicant was permitted by the Supreme Court to make an
argument based on statistics which demonstrated an elevated rate of refusal, but the
case settled before the judicial review
concluded.
Thus the «obverse» of that was that a conclusion that England was not clearly the natural forum
concludes the
argument in a service out
case.