Has the Nissan headlamps case been settled?
461817
The case was settled in January.
690529
Well even though there seems to be a contract orally for the sale of land s.53 of the law of property act 1925 applies as well as s2. law of property act 1989, which means that all sale of land must be in writing and are usual by deed. So practically there is not legally enforceable agreement until contracts are exchanged. So even if tom has spent money on a survey he may not recover.\nThere is debate in this area , but in the uk this is inherent risk in these transactions. He may bring a claim for damages under Hadley v.Baxendale, only for his loss eg the survey costs.\n\nAs far as the car is concerned, no consideration has passed so Tom has not really lost anything, he could enforce the contract, but courts are unlikley to enforce specific performance. Practically if the car is £500 there are plenty like it perhaps, but if the price was more £100,000 eg for a RUF modified porshce which are built to order then as there is nothing like it the court may order specific performance of the contract. Orally contracts cannot usually be enforced without some evidence showing intention.
586886
I would start with this website, and if it is not there, call: http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/tobacco/settlement.shtm
35181
It means the case has been closed, settled, decided.
983529
The government had allowed the illegal commercial Establishments in the residential areas, against the municipal rules and this has been going on for a long time, The Supreme Court, after having successfully interfered in the case relating to the measures to contain the pollution due to buses, now wants to vigorously pursue the matter. It does appear to be hard case, where the livelihood of a number of people at stake. This state of affairs prevails in other parts of the country. The kind of lawlessness has been going on for ever. Let us wait and see to what end this matter will be pursued by both the government and the judiciary and what the ramifications it will have on the rest of the country.
368214
this has been on the news this week in the metropolitan Philadelphia area.  You certainly have a case regardless if you purchased the product or if it was given to you as a sample.  I'm not sure who you need to contact in your area, but if you do a little investigating, it shouldn't be too hard for you to find out.
488085
could be. Renault DOES own Nissan.
477417
NO. It is still unsolved.
887506
No.  \n\nIt sounds more like a lack of evidence on the driver's part to plead his case to the judge, and he should have had an interpreter there with him.  (Later read there was an interpreter...okay, good)\n\nI should clarify what I mean by evidence:\n\nThere are different types of tire marks; there are tread marks, break marks and yaw marks.  They each represent a different type of situation that a car must have been under in order to make each of those marks.  The cop, must have interpreted those in his evidence to the judge and there's no way that the driver or anyone else here could know that...that's part of a traffic collition scene investigation...and it's done at the time the report is made.  \n\nSo...my answer is still NO, its wasn't based on prejudice but lack of understanding from the driver's knowledge on forensic evidence and law.  Your driver can't dispute what he doesn't know.  So the judge found him guilty because he could not dispute the cops report on the driver, there was no doubt about the report.
55922
I second the motion (or third it as the case may be).  There is no acceptable reason for anyone to drive with snow covering any of the glass surfaces on their vehicle, including the headlamps.  More accidents are caused by this than by snow on the streets and roads.\nEven if someone is driving another person to a hospital or some other emergency, they should take the time necessary to clear off the glass.
1051852
The laws may difer from state to state etc...I suggest that you call Motor Vehicles and get the answer straight from the source. If anyone would know how to fix this problem legally they would. I'm sure that this has happened to someone else at some time or another.\n If that doesn't work then you are left to think up a clever way to sell it to someone else.
887205
------------\nThe most damning piece of evidence in this controversy is the suppression of the NIMH battery. \n*\nThis battery was developed by a small Michigan research company. GM invested in this technology, and the NIMH battery was used in the two most successful electric cars built to date: GM's EV1 and the Toyota RAV4 EV.\n*\nSo what happened? After California gave in to industry pressure and scrapped their electric car mandate, nearly all of the electric cars on the road were crushed, and GM sold the patents for NIMH batteries to Chevron and Texaco.\n*\nA company named Cobasys was formed by the oil companies to control the patents. Cobasys sued Toyota and others to stop production of the large-size NIMH batteries used by electric vehicles.\n*\nSo how good are these batteries? Good enough to provide at least 200-mile ranges to electric cars. And they are durable. There are a few Toyota RAV 4 EVs still on the road, with the original batteries still installed. Many of these batteries have over 100,000 miles on them, with no failures.\n*\nCobasys makes it very, very difficult for anybody to manufacture large-size NIMH batteries. This means they are giving up markets for things like automotive starter batteries, motorized wheelchairs, golf carts, marine batteries, etc. \n*\nBear in mind that these are very, very good batteries, so NIMHs could dominate all of those markets if large-size NIMHs were sold. Somebody over there is VERY afraid of electric vehicles.\n----------
628726
Yes it is - (in the UK that is - hope you are in the UK?).  You can request proof that appropriate signs were in place as stipulated in the Road Traffic Act.  You may find that sending this letter may get on their wick to the point that they will drop the speeding claim - obviously they have to have photographic evidence of the offence also!  As per the RTA they also have to provide the items requested in the letter.  I managed to get off a speeding fine with it.  \n\n\nIn order that I may honestly complete the required information requested on the reverse of the form, I require the photographic evidence of the alleged offence in order that I may ascertain who was driving.\n\nI will also require:-\n\n•The name of the manufacturer, including make and model and serial number of the radar or laser gun used.\n\n•Copies of the manufacturers recommended maintenance schedule for the above device.\n\n•Copies of the manufacturer’s literature as it relates to the correct use, including but not limited to, mounting, aiming, weather and traffic limitations for the device used.\n\n•A copy of the past six months maintenance records, including but not limited to calibration specifications.\n\n•Photographic evidence that the legally required notifications of speed camera use were displayed at the site being used for speeding offence detection, or a copy of the relevant legislation that states that this in not necessary.\nPlease note that attempted delivery to the address listed on your letter, as detailed above, will be considered as valid service of this document.\n\nI look forward to your prompt response.\n\n\nGood luck with it!!  I don't know about anyone else - but I have no problem with fixed speed cameras - just the nasty sneaky mobile ones - normally hidden away in an area that has no risk to pedestrians, but significant possibility for speeding without endangerment to any other road users.  GRRR nasty money making machines!!
754817
nope! Sounds like you got away with it for awhile! Let me guess, you were parked in a fire lane! Hefty fines!\n\nYou can always go to court to despute it, but don't expect to win!
948622
Just not published in detail. If the charges were dropped, it should say they were dismissed and maybe give the reason.
250943
This might help, it gave me enough info to get started on my A6....\n\nhttp://www.lotzabutta.com/html/images/car/AudiA4/DIY/headlamp/DIYa4.htm
610133
Not realy. Check out this article:\n\nhttp://yahoo.businessweek.com/autos/content/may2006/bw20060504_832755.htm