effective implementation of the necessity defense
in light of current
scope of the business necessity defense
in the context of criminal
To combat the fear of excluding low-income borrowers, the Inclusive Communities Court expanded the use of the business necessity defense
so that only practices or policies that create an artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary barrier to capital or a loan are liable under the FHA through disparate impact theory.
74) This argument implicitly assumes that evidence of state medical marijuana law is only probative of one potential "fact of consequence" in a trafficking prosecution: whether marijuana establishes a necessity defense
The direct consequence of the CMS and Sempra annulment decisions regarding BIT necessity clauses is that such clauses will become the central focus of the analysis of the necessity defense
in pending cases of the Argentine saga (53) and in others, with Article 25 playing a residual role (54).
In addition to being the first opinion delivered by the European Court of Human Rights, it was the first successful necessity defense
raised by a country found to have violated express treaty provisions.
125) Doctrinal sources in other jurisdictions note the reluctance of courts to allow the defence but present the same argument whereby a consistent application of the elements of the defence would allow many of those who commit civil disobedience to invoke it: see Steven M Bauer & Peter J Eckerstom, "The State Made Me Do It: The Applicability of the Necessity Defense
to Civil Disobedience" (1987) 39:5 Stan L Rev 1173.
13) With limited grounds for annulment, both the annulment decisions and awards in the Argentine Gas Cases differed as to the proper interpretation of the necessity defense
under both the bilateral investment treaty between Argentina and the United States (the U.
Others might plan to assert a necessity defense
grounded in international law in response to a criminal prosecution.
The Court ultimately rejected a necessity defense
on the instant facts because the proffered evidence did not support the purported "magnitude of injuries" or "imminence of the danger to .
Since defendant will not be allowed to repudiate its own prior admissions, the Court turns to the issue of defendant's medical necessity defense
The most important file contains Bill Quigley's comprehensive argumentation as to why the court should allow us to present a necessity defense
based on international law.