Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 39 results (0.061 seconds)

Nov 20 2003 (SC)

Liverpool and London S.P. and I Asson. Ltd. Vs. M.V. Sea Success I and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-20-2003

Reported in : JT2003(9)SC218; 2003(10)SCALE1; (2004)9SCC512

..... no federal lien can be had for unpaid insurance premiums. this we cannot do. in the nineteenth century, an insurance policy on a ship was viewed as a contract for the personal indemnity of the insured ship's owner. under this reasoning, no lien against the ship itself could possibly arise as the result of an insurance policy; 'unless the ..... international convention on civil liability for oil pollution 1969. under the regime thereby introduced a shipowner is legally unable to trade or put to sea without having effected oil pollution indemnity insurance and having adequate liability insurance is as 'necessary' to a shipowner as having fuel, stores, navigational equipment or other well-recognised 'necessaries'. it is also arguable ..... c. surety bond; d. financial guarantee, accompanied by guarantor's evidence of self insurance;e. letter of credit; f. certificate of entry evidencing coverage by a protection and indemnity club; or g. certificate of deposit with assignment of negotiable interest. interim approvala completed application form and appropriate documentation evidencing proof of financial responsibility which is submitted by 31 august ..... a compulsory third party risk insurance cover and the standard format charter parties mostly have printed clauses making it mandatory for a vessel to have a valid protection and indemnity cover for want of which such vessels are not accepted for charter.69. chapter iv of the inland vessels act provides for a compulsory insurance in terms whereof .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2003 (SC)

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Vs. Annapurna Construction

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-29-2003

Reported in : AIR2003SC3660; 2003(6)ALD85(SC); 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)56; 2003(3)ARBLR119(SC); [2003(4)JCR87(SC)]; JT2003(Suppl1)SC280; (2003)3MLJ185(SC); 2003(7)SCALE20; (2003)8SCC154; [2003]4

..... special case to get the work completed within 4(four) months as per latest price list of bccl (copy enclosed), subject to submissions of indemnity bond on non-judicial stamp paper of required value in the approved proforma of bccl and also insurance against fire, theft and damages etc. ..... the arbitrator while passing the award in relation to some in terms failed and/or neglected to take into consideration the relevant clauses of the contract, nor did he take into consideration the relevant materials for the purpose of arriving at a correct fact. such an order would amount to ..... parshad & sons ltd. v. union of india : [1960]2scr793 , this court clearly held that if damages are awarded ignoring the expressed terms of the contract, the arbitrator would commit misconduct of the proceedings. reference in this connection may also be made to naihati jute mills ltd. v. khyaliram jagannath : [1968] ..... sinha is correct in his submission that the learned arbitrator has not taken into consideration the effect and purport of the following clause in the contract:'provided always that:(a) contractor/contractors shall not be entitled to any payment for any additional work done unless he/they have received an order ..... was agreed that the extension of time was granted subject to payment of penalty. the learned counsel would further submit that in terms of the contract the appellant had been supplied with all the essential raw materials, namely, cement, steel etc. which would cover about 95% of the total .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 2003 (FN)

McConnell Vs. Federal Election Comm'n

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-10-2003

..... e)(11)(ii), (iii) (reports of children s program, and retention of records sufficient to substantiate compliance with the commercial limits on children s programming ); 73.3613(a) (network affiliation contracts); 73.3613(b), 73.3615, 73.3526(e)(5) (ownership-related reports); 73.3613(c) ( [m]anagement consultant agreements ); 73.3613(d) ( [t]ime brokerage agreements ..... deadline for filing disclosure statements based on the date when aggregate disbursements exceed $10,000 would open a significant loophole if advertisers were not required to disclose executory contracts. in the absence of that requirement, political supporters could avoid preelection disclosures concerning ads slated to run during the final week of a campaign simply by making ..... to particular applications of that disclosure requirement. this court is also unpersuaded by plaintiffs challenge to new feca 304(f)(5) s requirement regarding the disclosure of executory contracts. the new provision mandates disclosure only when a person makes disbursements totaling more than $10,000 in any calendar year to pay for electioneering communications. given the ..... $1,000 or more to the individual or group paying for the communication, but erred in finding 304(f)(5) invalid because it mandates disclosure of executory contracts for communications that have not yet aired. because the important state interests identified in buckley providing the electorate with information, deterring actual corruption and avoiding its appearance, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 2003 (FN)

Pharmaceutical Research and Mfrs. of America Vs. Walsh

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-22-2003

..... . 273 , 283 (2002). petitioner quite obviously cannot satisfy this requirement and therefore arguably is not entitled to bring a pre-emption lawsuit as a third-party beneficiary to the medicaid contract. respondents have not advanced this argument in this case. however, were the issue to be raised, i would give careful consideration to whether spending clause legislation can be enforced by ..... secretary-they are not void under the supremacy clause. it is not apparent to me where the plurality finds the congressional directive to pre-empt state plans that breach a contract between the federal government and the state. cf. part i-d, infra. in my view, no such directive exists, and states are free to deviate from the medicaid act's ..... respect to petitioner's pre-emption claim. the court has stated that spending clause legislation "is much in the nature of a contract." 683 pennhurst state school and hospital v. halderman, 451 u. s. 1, 17 (1981). this contract analogy raises serious questions as to whether third parties may sue to enforce spending clause legislation-through pre-emption or otherwise. see blessing ..... . freestone, 520 u. s. 329 , 349-350 (1997) (scalia, j., concurring). in contract law, a third party to the contract (as petitioner is here) may only sue for breach if he is the "intended beneficiary" of the contract. see, e. g., restatement (second) of contracts 304 (1979) ("a promise in a contract creates a duty in the promisor to any intended beneficiary to perform the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2003 (FN)

Gratz Vs. Bollinger

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-23-2003

..... program like jacksonville's need only demonstrate that it is able and ready to bid on contracts and that a discriminatory policy prevents it from doing so on an equal basis." ibid. in bringing his equal protection challenge against the university's use ..... to a set-aside program, the 'injury in fact' is the inability to compete on an equal footing in the bidding process, not the loss of contract." id., at 666. we concluded that in the face of such a barrier, "[t]o establish standing ... , a party challenging a set-aside ..... 1981(a) provides: "all persons within the jurisdiction of the united states shall have the same right in every state and territory to make and enforce contracts, ... and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens." ..... have explained that a contract for educational services is a "contract" for purposes of 1981. see runyon v. mccrary, 427 u. s. 160 , 172 (1976). finally, purposeful discrimination that violates the equal protection ..... likewise, with respect to 1981, we have explained that the provision was "meant, by its broad terms, to proscribe discrimination in the making or enforcement of contracts against, or in favor of, any race." mc donald v. santa fe trail transp. co., 427 u. s. 273 , 295-296 (1976). furthermore, we .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2003 (FN)

Green Tree Financial Corp. Vs. Bazzle

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-23-2003

..... completely obvious. at the same time, we cannot automatically accept the south carolina supreme court's resolution of this contractinterpretation question. under the terms of the parties' contracts, the question-whether the agreement forbids class arbitration-is for the arbitrator to decide. the parties agreed to submit to the arbitrator "[alll disputes, claims, or ..... to, money damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief." app. 34 (emphasis added, capitalization in original). respondents daniel lackey and george and florine buggs entered into loan contracts and security agreements for the purchase of mobile homes with green tree. these agreements contained arbitration clauses that were, in all relevant respects, identical to the bazzles' arbitration ..... said nor implied that it would have authorized class arbitration had the parties' arbitration agreement forbidden it. whether green tree is right about the contracts presents a disputed issue of contract interpretation. the contracts say that disputes "shall be resolved ... by one arbitrator selected by us [green tree] with consent of you [green tree's customer]." ..... , and green tree appealed. the state supreme court withdrew both cases from the appeals court, assumed jurisdiction, and consolidated the proceedings. that court held that the contracts were silent in respect to class arbitration, that they consequently authorized class arbitration, and that arbitration had properly taken that form. held: the judgment is vacated, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 2003 (FN)

Smith Vs. Doe

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-05-2003

smith v. doe - 538 u.s. 84 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus smith et al. v. doe et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 01-729. argued november 13, 2002-decided march 5, 2003 under the alaska sex offender registration act (act), any sex offender or child kidnaper incarcerated in the state must register with the department of corrections within 30 days before his release, providing his name, address, and other specified information. if the individual is at liberty, he must register with local law enforcement authorities within a working day of his conviction or of entering the state. if he was convicted of a single, nonaggravated sex crime, the offender must provide annual verification of the submitted information for 15 years. if he was convicted of an aggravated sex offense or of two or more sex offenses, he must register for life and verify the information quarterly. the offender's information is forwarded to the department of public safety, which maintains a central registry of sex offenders. some of the data, such as fingerprints, driver's license number, anticipated change of address, and whether the offender has had medical treatment afterwards, are kept confidential. the offender's name, aliases, address, photograph, physical description, description, license and identification numbers of motor vehicles, place of employment, date of birth, crime, date and place of conviction, length and conditions of sentence, and a .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 05 2003 (FN)

illinois Ex Rel. Madigan Vs. Telemarketing Associates, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-05-2003

..... for-profit fundraising corporations and their owner (collectively telemarketers), were retained by vietnow national headquarters, a charitable nonprofit corporation, to solicit donations to aid vietnam veterans. the contracts between those parties provided, among other things, that telemarketers would retain 85 percent of the gross receipts from illinois donors, leaving 15 percent for vietnow. the illinois ..... laws against telemarketers for specific instances of deliberate deception. however, the illinois supreme court said, telemarketers' solicitation statements were alleged to be false only because telemarketers contracted for 85 percent of the gross receipts and failed to disclose this information to donors. the court concluded that the attorney general's complaint was, in essence ..... aid vietnam veterans. id., at 348, 763 n. e. 2d, at 291. in this opinion, we generally refer to respondents, collectively, as "telemarketers. " the contracts between the charity, vietnow, and the fundraisers, telemarketers, provided that telemarketers would retain 85 percent of the gross receipts from donors within illinois, leaving 15 percent for viet now ..... ibid. "[h]igh solicitation costs," the illinois supreme court stressed, "can be attributable to a number of factors." ibid. in this case, the court noted, telemarketers contracted to provide a "wide range" of services in addition to telephone solicitation. ibid. for example, they agreed to publish a newsletter and to maintain a toll-free information .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 2003 (FN)

Virginia Vs. Black

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-07-2003

virginia v. black - 538 u.s. 343 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus virginia v. black et al. certiorari to the supreme court of virginia no. 01-1107. argued december 11, 2002-decided april 7, 2003 respondents were convicted separately of violating a virginia statute that makes it a felony "for any person ..., with the intent of intimidating any person or group ... , to burn a cross on the property of another, a highway or other public place," and specifies that "[a]ny such burning ... shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to intimidate a person or group." when respondent black objected on first amendment grounds to his trial court's jury instruction that cross burning by itself is sufficient evidence from which the required "intent to intimidate" could be inferred, the prosecutor responded that the instruction was taken straight out of the virginia model instructions. respondent o'mara pleaded guilty to charges of violating the statute, but reserved the right to challenge its constitutionality. at respondent elliott's trial, the judge instructed the jury as to what the commonwealth had to prove, but did not give an instruction on the meaning of the word "intimidate," nor on the statute's prima facie evidence provision. consolidating all three cases, the virginia supreme court held that the crossburning statute is unconstitutional on its face; that it is analytically indistinguishable from the ordinance found unconstitutional in r. a. v. v. st. paul, 505 u. s. 377 ; that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 2003 (FN)

Archer Vs. Warner

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-31-2003

..... brought solely in order to enforce the agreement to pay [the amount in the settlement agreement]"). this crucial fact demonstrates that petitioners seek to recover a debt based only in contract, not in fraud. 2 petitioners argue that any prepetition waiver of nondischargeability protections should be deemed unenforceable because it is inconsistent with the bankruptcy code and impairs the rights ..... intervening negligent acts of a third party in a negligence action. in this case, the parties have made clear their intent to replace the old "fraud" debt with a new "contract" debt. accordingly, the only debt that remains intact for bankruptcy purposes is the one "obtained by" voluntary agreement of the parties, not by fraud. petitioners' own actions in the ..... should affirm the court of appeals' decision on alternative grounds. she says that the settlement agreement and releases not only worked a novation by converting potential tort liabilities into a contract debt, but also included a promise that the archers would not make the present claim of nondischargeability for fraud. she adds that, in any event, because the archers dismissed ..... the archers for money obtained by fraud with (2) a new debt. the new debt was not for money obtained by fraud. it was for money promised in a settlement contract. and it was consequently dischargeable in bankruptcy. we granted the archers' petition for certiorari, 536 u. s. 938 (2002), because different circuits have come to different conclusions about .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //