Nomination v. Succession – SC Finally Settles the Debate

Nomination v. Succession – SC Finally Settles the Debate

Historical Background

The longstanding debate on the conflict between the rights of nominees and legal heirs over the devolution of shares has always been the cause of much controversy and confusion despite the settled legal position holding the legal heir as the ultimate rightful owner of the property. A nominee can act only as a trustee on behalf of the legal heir and hold such property until a conclusive decision on the matter of succession is reached.[1] However, the introduction … Read the rest

Common sense briefly prevails in UK’s “taking back control of our laws” debate

u-turn

Things have surely come to a pretty pass when it is front page news twice in two weeks that the Government has decided not to press on with doing something daft.  First, the abandonment of smart motorways and last week, reports that the Government has backed away from its original proposal to wipe all EU-sourced regulations from the statute book at the end of this year. More predictable is the number of MPs who are nonetheless recorded as being variously … Read the rest

Justices debate propriety of litigation in trial courts while defendants are on appeal seeking arbitration

Justices debate propriety of litigation in trial courts while defendants are on appeal seeking arbitration

Share

If anything is clear after Tuesday’s argument in Coinbase v. Bielski, it is that the justices are not going to agree on the answer. The case asks what a trial court should do if it denies a defendant’s motion for arbitration. The Federal Arbitration Act gives the defendant the right to an immediate (“interlocutory”) appeal, but it says nothing about a stay of litigation in the district court. So in these cases (proposed class actions against Coinbase, a … Read the rest

In lawsuit against tech companies, justices debate what it means to “aid and abet” terrorism

In lawsuit against tech companies, justices debate what it means to “aid and abet” terrorism

Share

The Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared wary of a lawsuit seeking to hold Twitter, Facebook, and Google liable for aiding and abetting international terrorism based on ISIS’s use of the companies’ platforms. But during nearly three hours of oral argument, the justices struggled to draw a line between holding organizations responsible for supporting terrorism and allowing organizations to go about legitimate business, even if they may come in contact with terrorists as part of that business.

The dispute, Twitter Read the rest