Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 2009 Page 1 of about 60 results (0.139 seconds)

Oct 28 2009 (SC)

A.K. Lakshmipathy (Dead) and ors. Vs. Rai Saheb Pannalal H. Lahoti Cha ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-28-2009

Reported in : AIR2010SC577; 2010(1)AWC317(SC); JT2009(13)SC589; (2009)8MLJ693(SC); 2010(I)OLR(SC)118; 2009(13)SCALE457; (2010)1SCC287

..... was reproduced verbatim and the high court in the impugned order truly went in depth into the discussion of the terms and conditions embodied in the contract for sale. we are in agreement with the high court that its analysis was impregnable. this submission of mr. venugopal, learned senior counsel for ..... bound to extend their full cooperation to the vendees and to sign all necessary papers and documents. in clauses 7 to 9 of the said contract, the respondents agreed to obtain non-encumbrance and clearance certificates from the income tax department and also to settle all payments to be made towards ..... questions at hand. the learned counsel for the appellants argued that the appellants had shown their willingness and readiness to perform their part of the contract by sending a photostat copy of a cheque within the stipulated time. mr. p.s. patwalia, the learned senior counsel for the respondents, ..... suit being o.s. no. 317/1985 in the court of the principal subordinate judge, r.r. district, hyderabad for specific performance of the said contract for sale by the seller- respondents. the trial court framed no less than 17 issues in all. after examining witnesses, hearing arguments of both the ..... of a cheque of rs. 5 lakhs, certified by the banker as 'good for payment', thus showing their readiness and willingness to complete the contract with the balance consideration but with the condition that the respondent had to obtain a certificate from, the endowment department. in reply, on 7th of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 2009 (FN)

Sigma Finance Corporation, Re

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Oct-29-2009

..... strange if a term changing so fundamentally the financial structure of the relationship were to be buried in a provision such as clause 2, concerned essentially with the measure of indemnity, rather than being given a prominent position on its own" 10. in investors compensation scheme at pp.912g-913f, lord hoffmann summarised the development of the principles of contractual interpretation ..... deed, in a situation which the parties never contemplated, may appear fortuitous or arbitrary does not therefore carry much weight. it is not for the court to make a new contract for experienced commercial operators advised by expert lawyers. 45. third, clause 7.6 (the crucial provision which has to be fitted into the landscape of the deed as a whole ..... to a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would reasonably have been available to the parties in the situation in which they were at the time of the contract. (2) the background was famously referred to by lord wilberforce as the "matrix of fact," but this phrase is, if anything, an understated description of what the background may include ..... instruments, using funds raised by issuing or guaranteeing us dollar and euro medium term notes (mtns) as well as liquidity from other sources, such as facilities, derivatives, repurchase (or "repo") contracts and capital notes (the last two categories representing its unsecured creditors). all of sigma's assets are secured in favour of its secured creditors upon the terms of a security .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2009 (SC)

V. Laxminarasamma Vs. A. Yadaiah (Dead) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-29-2009

Reported in : (2009)5SCC478

arijit pasayat, j.1. during the hearing of these appeals it was noticed that two decisions of this court rendered by two learned single judges expressed contrary views and the matter was referred to a larger bench. the dispute relates to the andhra pradesh land grabbing (prohibition) act, 1982 ( in short 'act'). the two decisions which were referred to by the bench while making reference to a larger bench were konda lakshmana bapuji v. government of andhra pradesh and ors. : [2002]1scr651 and n. srinivasa rao v. special court under the a.p. land grabbing (prohibition) act and ors. : air2006sc3691 . the three judge bench by judgment dated 3.3.2009 held that kunda lakshmana bapuji case (supra) lays down the correct law and n. srinivasa rao does not. the reference was accordingly answered. the three judge bench was of the view that the tribunal/special court constituted under the act has requisite jurisdiction to go into the question of adverse possession. the three judge bench also noticed that it is one thing to say that a summary proceeding cannot be resorted to when a noticee resists bonefide dispute involving complicated questions of title and his right remain in possession of the land. but, it is another thing to say that although both the special court and/or tribunal which has all the powers of a civil court would not be entitled to enter into such a contention. after the reference was answered this matter is placed before us.2. so far as the appellant is concerned the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 04 2009 (FN)

Arthur Andersen Llp Vs. Carlisle

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-04-2009

..... pertained to issues parties agreed to arbitrate, and the latter referred to an entity (the equal employment opportunity commission) which obviously had no third-party obligations under the contract in question. neither these nor any of our other cases have presented for decision the question whether arbitration agreements that are otherwise enforceable by (or against) third parties ..... claims are referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing. if a written arbitration provision is made enforceable against (or for the benefit of) a third party under state contract law, the statute s terms are fulfilled.[ footnote 6 ] respondents final fallback consists of reliance upon dicta in our opinions, such as the statement that arbitration is ..... a denied stay request is immeasurably more simple and less factbound than the threshold determination respondents would replace it with: whether the litigant was a party to the contract (an especially difficult question when the written agreement is not signed). it is more appropriate to grapple with that merits question after the court has accepted jurisdiction over ..... entitled to request and obtain a stay under 3 because that dispute is referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing. because traditional state-law principles allow enforcement of contracts by (or against) nonparties through, e.g., assumption or third-party beneficiary theories, the sixth circuit erred in holding that 3 relief is categorically not available to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 2009 (FN)

Wyeth Vs. Levine

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-04-2009

wyeth v. levine - 06-1249 (2009) syllabus october term, 2008 wyeth v. levine supreme court of the united states wyeth v . levine certiorari to the supreme court of vermont no. 06 1249.?argued november 3, 2008 decided march 4, 2009 petitioner wyeth manufactures the antinausea drug phenergan. after a clinician injected respondent levine with phenergan by the iv-push method, whereby a drug is injected directly into a patient s vein, the drug entered levine s artery, she developed gangrene, and doctors amputated her forearm. levine brought a state-law damages action, alleging, inter alia, that wyeth had failed to provide an adequate warning about the significant risks of administering phenergan by the iv-push method. the vermont jury determined that levine s injury would not have occurred if phenergan s label included an adequate warning, and it awarded damages for her pain and suffering, substantial medical expenses, and loss of her livelihood as a professional musician. declining to overturn the verdict, the trial court rejected wyeth s argument that levine s failure-to-warn claims were pre-empted by federal law because phenergan s labeling had been approved by the federal food and drug administration (fda). the vermont supreme court affirmed. held: federal law does not pre-empt levine s claim that phenergan s label did not contain an adequate warning about the iv-push method of administration. pp. 6 25. (a) the argument that levine s state-law claims are pre-empted because it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 2009 (FN)

Office of Fair Trading (Oft) Vs. Abbey National Plc and ors

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-25-2009

..... again it is not suggested that it raises on the facts of this case any particular issue of european law. the banks primary case is that the relevant contracts are the contracts for an overall package of banking facilities made by the banks with their customers. andrew smith j rejected this analysis as unnatural: payments by way of relevant ..... different treatment and that an additional criterion of unfairness should be introduced, namely the non-transparency of a contract term? (oj no c 159, 17.6.1991). the european parliament repeated its stance that individually negotiated terms should fall outside the proposal, and proposed that terms containing ..... affairs and citizens rights of the european parliament issued a report on 9 april 1991 (a3-0091/91), which suggested the amendment of the proposal to exclude individually negotiated contract terms. the economic and social committee (consulted by the council of ministers) issued its opinion on 24 april 1991, suggesting both that individually negotiated contractual terms required ..... was particularly influential. in september 1992 the council brought forward new proposals which can be described as a compromise solution balancing the need for consumer protection against residual freedom of contract. recital (19) reflects part of this compromise, though it does not contribute very much to the understanding of article 4(2): whereas, for the purposes of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 2009 (FN)

Melendez-diaz Vs. Massachusetts

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-25-2009

melendez-diaz v. massachusetts - 07-591 (2009) syllabus october term, 2008 melendez-diaz v. massachusetts supreme court of the united states melendez-diaz v . massachusetts certiorari to the appeals court of massachusetts no. 07 591.?argued november 10, 2008 decided june 25, 2009 at petitioner s state-court drug trial, the prosecution introduced certificates of state laboratory analysts stating that material seized by police and connected to petitioner was cocaine of a certain quantity. as required by massachusetts law, the certificates were sworn to before a notary public and were submitted as prima facie evidence of what they asserted. petitioner objected, asserting that crawford v. washington , 541 u. s. 36 , required the analysts to testify in person. the trial court disagreed, the certificates were admitted, and petitioner was convicted. the massachusetts appeals court affirmed, rejecting petitioner s claim that the certificates admission violated the sixth amendment. held: the admission of the certificates violated petitioner s sixth amendment right to confront the witnesses against him. pp. 3 23. (a) under crawford, a witness s testimony against a defendant is inadmissible unless the witness appears at trial or, if the witness is unavailable, the defendant had a prior opportunity for cross-examination. 541 u. s., at 54. the certificates here are affidavits, which fall within the core class of testimonial statements covered by the confrontation clause, id., at 51. they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2009 (FN)

Coeur Alaska, Inc. Vs. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-22-2009

coeur alaska, inc. v. southeast alaska conservation council - 07-984 (2009) syllabus october term, 2008 coeur alaska, inc. v. southeast alaskaconservation council supreme court of the united states coeur alaska, inc. v . southeast alaska conservation council et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 07 984.?argued january 12, 2009 decided june 22, 2009 in reviving a closed alaska gold mine using a froth flotation technique, petitioner coeur alaska, inc., plans to dispose of the resulting waste material, a rock and water mixture called slurry, by pumping it into a nearby lake and then discharging purified lake water into a downstream creek. the clean water act (cwa), inter alia, classifies crushed rock as a pollutant, 352(6); forbids its discharge [e]xcept as in compliance with the act, 301(a); empowers the army corps of engineers (corps) to issue permits for the discharge of fill material, 404(a); and authorizes the environmental protection agency (epa) to issue a permit for the discharge of any pollutant, [e]xcept as provided in [ 404], 402(a). the corps and the epa together define fill material as any material [that] has the effect of [c]hanging the bottom elevation of water, including slurry or similar mining-related materials. 40 cfr 232.2. coeur alaska obtained a 404 permit for the slurry discharge from the corps and a 402 permit for the lake water discharge from the epa. respondent environmental groups (collectively, seacc) sued .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 18 2009 (FN)

Ashcroft Vs. Iqbal

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-18-2009

..... allegations on the ground that they are unrealistic or nonsensical. we do not so characterize them any more than the court in twombly rejected the plaintiffs express allegation of a contract, combination or conspiracy to prevent competitive entry, id. , at 551, because it thought that claim too chimerical to be maintained. it is the conclusory nature of respondent s allegations, rather ..... agreement not to compete and to forestall competitive entry, in violation of the sherman act, 15 u. s. c. 1. recognizing that 1 enjoins only anticompetitive conduct effected by a contract, combination, or conspiracy, copperweld corp. v. independence tube corp. , 467 u. s. 752 , 775 (1984), the plaintiffs in twombly flatly pleaded that the defendants ha[d] entered into a ..... contract, combination or conspiracy to prevent competitive entry and ha[d] agreed not to compete with one another. 550 u. s., at 551 (internal quotation marks omitted). the complaint also alleged .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2009 (FN)

14 Penn Plaza Llc Vs. Pyett

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-01-2009

..... of employment. 29 u. s. c. 159(a). as the employees exclusive bargaining representative, the union enjoys broad authority in the negotiation and administration of [the] collective bargaining contract. communications workers v. beck , 487 u. s. 735 , 739 (1988) (internal quotation marks omitted). but this broad authority is accompanied by a responsibility of equal scope ..... . after the initial arbitration hearing, the union withdrew the first set of respondents grievances the age-discrimination claims from arbitration. because it had consented to the contract for new security personnel at 14 penn plaza, the union believed that it could not legitimately object to respondents reassignments as discriminatory. but the union continued to ..... rule they engendered. those cases did not involve the issue of the enforceability of an agreement to arbitrate statutory claims, but the quite different issue whether arbitration of contract-based claims precluded subsequent judicial resolution of statutory claims. gilmer, supra, at 35. gardner-denver does not control the outcome where, as here, the collective- ..... . the union requested arbitration under the cba, but after the initial hearing, withdrew the age-discrimination claims on the ground that its consent to the new security contract precluded it from objecting to respondents reassignments as discriminatory. respondents then filed a complaint with the equal employment opportunity commission (eeoc) alleging that petitioners had violated their adea .....

Tag this Judgment!


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