R v Gnango (2012) R v Gnango, is the leading English criminal law case on the interaction of joint enterprise, transferred malice, and exemption from criminal liability where a party to what would normally be a crime is the victim of it. The Supreme Court held, restoring Gnango’s conviction for the murder of Magda Pniewska, that he was guilty or murse not with standing the fact that he had not fired the shot which killed Magnda during the shoot out which led to her death, and that the fatal shot
Words: 444 - Pages: 2
Court Comparison Contrast Paper During the course of reading this paper you will be introduced to the difference between trial court and appellate court. For example in trial courts there is actually only one judge within the room, he basically decides what can and can’t be used as evidence within the courtroom. In appellate courts there are five groups of three judges who basically divide’s the cases between them. You will also be to understand the difference between federal
Words: 1230 - Pages: 5
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY Graduate School of Business Master of Business Administration Business Law Case 3 GSIS vs. Court of Appeals Submitted by: Liao, Weiqin Facts of the case • National Food Authority (NFA, formerly National Grains Authority) was the owner of a Chevrolet truck which was insured against liabilities for death of and injuries to third persons with the GSIS. • On May 9, 1979, at about 7:00 in the evening at Tabon-Tabon, Butuan City, the said truck driven by Guillermo
Words: 811 - Pages: 4
Appeals Process Paper When any defendant is found guilty, of any charge, is entitled to an appeal to at least one level of appellate court (Meyer, J & Grant, D. 2003). An appeal is when a defendant has already been found guilty in court, and they decide to take it to a higher court in order to change the ruling (Meyer, J & Grant, D. 2003). Basically it is a process that takes place, because the defendant and their attorney do not feel that the verdict given was accurate; and that could be due
Words: 830 - Pages: 4
ORTIGAS & CO. LTD., VS COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 126102, December 4, 2000 Topic: POLICE POWER FACTS: * This petition seeks to reverse the decision of Court of Appeals, dated March 25, 1996, in CA – G.R. SP No. 39193, which nullified the write of the write of preliminary injunction issued by the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City, Bramch 261, in Civil Case No. 64931. * On August 25, 1976, petitioner Ortigas & Company sold to Emilia Hermoso, a parcel of land known as Lot
Words: 2054 - Pages: 9
BAR EXAMS QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 2001 GEN TOPIC: RECEIVERSHIP SPECIFIC: REMEDIES Joaquin filed a complaint against Jose for the foreclosure of a mortgage of a furniture factory with a large number of machinery and equipment. During the pendency of the foreclosure suit, Joaquin learned from reliable sources that Jose was quietly and gradually disposing of some of his machinery and equipment to a businessman friend who was also engaged in furniture manufacturing such that from confirmed reports Joaquin
Words: 37116 - Pages: 149
In 1965, New York City enacted its Landmarks Preservation Law, which protected historic landmarks and neighborhoods from destruction or alterations to their characters. This Landmarks Law also established the Landmarks Preservation Commission, whose purpose was to identify and designate the city’s landmarks (and districts) as well as regulate changes made to these designated structures. Penn Central Transportation Company owned the Grand Central Terminal, which had been designated as a landmark under
Words: 718 - Pages: 3
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No. 74457 March 20, 1987 RESTITUTO YNOT, petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, THE STATION COMMANDER, INTEGRATED NATIONAL POLICE, BAROTAC NUEVO, ILOILO and THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY, REGION IV, ILOILO CITY, respondents. Ramon A. Gonzales for petitioner. CRUZ, J.: The essence of due process is distilled in the immortal cry of Themistocles to Alcibiades "Strike — but hear me first!" It is this
Words: 4411 - Pages: 18
Lim vs People G.R. No. 130038 Sep.18, 2000 The case is an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming in toto that of the Regional Trial Court, Cebu City. Both courts found petitioner Rosa Lim guilty of twice violating Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 and imposing on her two one-year imprisonment for each of the two violations and ordered her to pay two fines, each amounting to P200,000.00. The trial court also ordered petitioner to return to Maria Antonia Seguan, the jewelry received
Words: 888 - Pages: 4
Article http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/court/2001-03-19-pizza.htm USA TODAY 03/19/2001 PAPA JOHN'S WINS A ROUND OVER PIZZA HUT WASHINGTON (AP) — Papa John's says its pizza is better than Pizza Hut's because it uses superior ingredients. On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to hear Pizza Hut's argument that the claim should be considered false advertising. The court, without comment, turned down an appeal by Pizza Hut, which won — and then lost — a false-advertising lawsuit
Words: 818 - Pages: 4
