Remove Court Decisions Remove Government Remove Personal Injury Remove Tort
article thumbnail

Supreme Court limits homeowners’ ability to sue their lenders in tort

At the Lectern

Balancing “the interests of homeowners in default against those seeking affordable home loans,” the Supreme Court in Sheen v. ” The court settles a conflict in Court of Appeal case law and notes a similar divide in federal district court rulings.

Tort 49
article thumbnail

Australian Federal Court dismisses the novel duty of care previously found in Sharma: what does it mean for future climate litigation in Australia?

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

2021 Federal Court Decision . In May 2021, the Court dismissed the application for an injunction. Based on the unchallenged scientific evidence brought by the plaintiffs, the Court recognized that the approval of the extension project would risk future injury to the children from climate hazards brought by global warming.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Is it Worth it to Become a Litigation Paralegal?

Paralegal Bootcamp

Legal research skills Legal research skills are essential for finding and analyzing laws, regulations, and court decisions pertinent to the case you’re working on. Attention to detail is very important for litigation paralegals. Being a proficient legal researcher makes you an invaluable asset to your team.

Paralegal 130
article thumbnail

China Adopts Restrictive Theory of Foreign State Immunity

Conflict of Laws

Article 6, on the other hand, says that a foreign state shall not be deemed to have consented to jurisdiction by appearing in Chinese court to assert immunity, by having its representatives testify, or by choosing Chinese law to govern a particular matter. These provisions track Articles 7-9 of the U.N. Convention. This makes sense.

article thumbnail

June 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

Justice Sotomayor dissented, writing that she believed the Court’s interpretation would allow defendants to “sidestep” the general bar on appellate review by “shoehorning” a civil rights or federal officer removal argument into their case for removal. The court invited the conservation groups to seek amicus curiae status.

Court 42