Home Maxims & Terms Act of State meaning in Urdu
Word Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Act of State

Act of State legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

1989 CLC 129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Words and Phrases

"Act of State", connotation of.

1973 PLD 563 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

"Acts of State"-Meaning in its wider sense.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Act of State", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/1573

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Act of State"

CLC 1989
Regular First Appeal No.21 of 1982, decided on 16th October, 1988.

1989 C L C 129

B.G. FRANCIS and others‑‑Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF NETHERLAND and others‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1982
THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents Civil Appeals Nos. 128 and 129 of 1978, decided on 7th April, 1982.

P L D 1982 Supreme Court 367

Civil Appeal No. 128/78 Versus Brig. ‑HIS HIGHNESS NAWAB MUHAMMAD ABBAS KHAN ABBASI AND others‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑ Position of Ruler and regulation of succession to Gaddi and of property of state.‑Bahawalpur State.
PLD 1966
Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 1965, decided on 9th November 1965

P L D 1966 Supreme Court 357

MIR AHMAD NAWAZ KHAN BUGHTI‑Appellant Versus SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL, LYALLPUR AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court:
PLD 1964
Regular Second Appeal No. 228 of 1957, decided on 1st July 1964.

P L D 1964 (W

Malik RAMIZ AHMAD‑Plaintiff — Appellant Versus PUNJAB PROVINCE‑Defendant — ‑Respondent

Court: Tort‑-Negligence‑-Damages, claim for, due to tortious acts of Government servants‑Doctrine of "act of State" or "sovereign act"‑Not applicable where Government acts in relation to its own nationals under Municipal law‑Maintenance of roads by Highway Authority or Government under Municipal law‑Cannot be treated as "sovereign act"‑Such authority or Government not absolved of responsibility in respect of negligent acts of its servants‑Negligent conduct of employees within scope of their employment‑ Liability of Government does not cease even if such conduct amounts to an offence Public bodies given statutory authority to create obstruction of highways‑Distinction between absolute and conditional statutory authority‑Whether such statutory authority absolute or conditional‑Question of construction of statute Obstruction to highways‑Generally indictable and actionable at law‑West Punjab Highways Act, 1948 replaced by West Pakistan Highways Ordinance (XXXII of 1959) ‑Confers no absolute autho rity in Highway Authority to act in manner causing nuisance or other injurious consequences with immunity‑Highway Authority repairing highways‑Duty cast on Authority to so stack bajri (gravel) on road as to prevent obstruction becoming danger to traveling public‑P. W. D. Chief Engineers Technical Memo. No. 1, 1933, p. 11‑West Punjab‑ Highways Act (VI of 1948), Ss. 12 & 25‑West Pakistan Highways Ordinance (XXXII of 1959), Ss. 12 & 25.
PLD 1978
Writ Petition No. 346 of 1969, decided on 4th December 1973.

P L D 1978 Lahore 1166

BRIGADIIR His HIGHNESS NAWAB MUHAMMAD ABBAS KHAN ABBASI, AMEER OF BAHAWALPUR- Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH -THE JOINT SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF STATES AND FRONTIER REGIONS, RAWALPINDI AND 23 OTHERS-Respondents

Court: -- Art. 225(1)(2)-Acceding States (Property) Order, 1961 (P. O. No. 12 of 1961)-vires of Legislation--Supreme Court in P L D 1972 S C 139 though holding Military rule imposed on country on and from 24-3-1969 to be entirely illegal yet at same time recognised and gave full effect to 1962 Constitution - Validity of acts dune thereunder no longer open to challenge-President's Order No. 12 of 1961, had, continued in force as on existing law framed by a competent Legislature-Contention that such order having been promulgated by an usurper was invalid, repelled.- Vires of Legislation.
PLD 1953
First Appeal No. 46 of 1950, decided on 18th February, 1953, from the decree of the Court of Atta Ullah, Senior Civil Judge, Rawalpindi, dated the 24th April, 1950.

P L D 1953 Lahore 339

WEST PUNJAB GOVERNMENT‑Appellant Versus PINDI‑JHELUM VALLEY TRANSPORT LTD., RAWALPINDI AND SIX OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Case‑law discussed.
PLD 1968
Miscellaneous Appeals Nos. 11 and 12 of 1952, decided on 29th September 1967.

P L D 1968 Karachi 276

CARL ZEISS STIFTUNG TRADING AS CARL ZEISS, OF HEIDENHIM, FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY‑Appellant Versus CARL ZEISS STIFTUNG, JENA, EAST GERMANY

Court: (b) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940), S. 14(1)‑Acceptance of application of foreign corporation by Registrar by application of principle of Conflict, of Laws‑‑‑Not exceptionable‑Principles as stated in r. 21(2) and r. 78 respectively of Dicey's Conflict of Laws, Ed. VII, .viz. that Court has no jurisdiction where an act of State is a ground of action and that law of domicile of a corporation governs it in respect of its constitution.
CLD 2013
2012-June-29

2013 C L D 748

PAKISTAN OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT PROMOTERS ASSOCIATION (POEPA) — Applicant Versus G.C.C. APPROVED MEDICAL CENTERS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE (GAMCA) AND GCC APPROVED MEDICAL CENTERS — Respondents

Court: Competition Commission of Pakistan
PLD 1984
Civil Review Petition No. 23 of 1982 in Civil Appeals Nos. 128 and 129 of 1978, decided on 27th November, 1983.

P L D 1984 Supreme Court 67

Present : Muhammad Haleem, C. J., Nasim Hasan Shah, Shafiur Rahman, Zqffar- Hussain Mirza and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN AND OTHf;RS-Respondents

Court: -- Art. 188-Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O. XXVI, r. 1--Review by Supreme Court-No error of fact or law apparent on face of record in impugned judgment as may be said to be self-evident, floating on surface, which Court should not allow to stand in record-Power of review enjoyed by Court, held, not attracted.-Review by Supreme Court.
PLD 1974
Civil Suits Nos. 284, 265, 330, 375, 387, 411, 415, 418 of 1969; 6 and 161 of 1970, decided on 15th February 1974.

P L D 1974 Karachi 254

MESSRS DADA LTD., KARACHI‑ — Plaintiffs Versus SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN,

Court: ---S. 7‑Provisions of S. 7 operative to legalise retrospectively levy of price differential surcharge‑Surcharge levied and collected in pursu ance of Notification No. S. R. O. 49 (R)/66 dated 23‑4‑66 and Public Notice dated 25‑4‑66‑Validated by S. 7‑Rules for assessment and collection of price equalization surcharge‑Not condition precedent to exercise of powers conferred under pct for ascertainment of price equalization surcharge and its recovery‑Adamjee Jute Mills Ltd. v, Controller of Imports & Exports P L D 1968 Dacca 894 dissented from.