Audilex

Follow Audilex
Share on
Copy link to clipboard

https://www.patreon.com/audilex An educational podcast aimed to provide you with narrations useful for your legal studies. The podcast is aimed at those studying the laws of England and Wales. It will contain narrations of cases, laws and international conventions.

Timur Boltaev

  • Jan 22, 2021 LATEST EPISODE
  • monthly NEW EPISODES
  • 1h 6m AVG DURATION
  • 79 EPISODES


Search for episodes from Audilex with a specific topic:

Latest episodes from Audilex

Facebook advertising policy as of January 2021

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 22, 2021 43:17


A narration of the Facebook advertising policy.

EC Guidelines For Trustworthy AI Introduction Part 1

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 19, 2020 18:11


EC Guidelines For Trustworthy AI Introduction Part 1 by Timur Boltaev

EC Guidelines For Trustworthy AI Executive Summary

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2020 13:52


EC Guidelines For Trustworthy AI Executive Summary by Timur Boltaev

Rodchenkov Anti - Doping Act Of 2019

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 17, 2020 21:14


An overview of the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act of 2019

Unwired v Huawei: The ETSI IPR Policy

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2020 24:49


Unwired v Huawei: The ETSI IPR Policy by Timur Boltaev

Unwired v Huawei - Standard Setting Organisations

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 8, 2020 11:39


Unwired v Huawei - Standard Setting Organisations by Timur Boltaev

Case Summary: Unwired v. Huawei

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 7, 2020 5:32


Case Summary: Unwired v. Huawei by Timur Boltaev

Unwired Planet International v Huawei: Patents A Legal Background

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 6, 2020 9:46


Unwired Planet International v Huawei: Patents A Legal Background by Timur Boltaev

About The Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 6, 2020 2:26


About The Podcast by Timur Boltaev

Shagang Shipping Company Ltd (in Liquidation) (Appellant) V HNA Group Company Ltd (Respondent)

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 14, 2020 91:39


Allegations that a bribe was paid to procure a contract are by no means unknown in international business disputes heard by the Commercial Court in London. Allegations that evidence was procured by torture are thankfully rare. In this case allegations of both bribery and torture were made. A claim under a guarantee of a contract to charter a vessel was met with a defence that the contract was procured by bribery, with the consequence that the guarantee was therefore unenforceable. The allegation of bribery was founded on evidence of confessions made by the individuals who had allegedly paid and received the bribe. The claimant in turn alleged that the confessions were obtained by torture and for that reason were inadmissible as evidence in legal proceedings.

Interview with Elina Teplinsky - Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 3, 2018 27:56


On law as a choice, practicing with the major US firm, creating for an international clientele and characteristics of a future lawyer.

Обзор Судебной Практики По Вопросам, Связанным С Применением 223 ФЗ

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 15, 2018 86:57


Обзор Судебной Практики По Вопросам, Связанным С Применением 223 ФЗ by Timur Boltaev

Kendall v. United States

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 1, 2018 28:13


A Supreme Court case.

United States v. The Amistad

Play Episode Listen Later May 17, 2018 11:51


United States v. Schooner Amistad, (1841), was a United States Supreme Court case resulting from the rebellion of Africans on board the Spanish schooner La Amistad in 1839. It was an unusual freedom suit that involved international issues and parties, as well as United States law. The historian Samuel Eliot Morison described it in 1969 as the most important court case involving slavery before being eclipsed by that of Dred Scott in 1857.

Cherokee Nation v. Georgia

Play Episode Listen Later May 17, 2018 192:27


Cherokee Nation v. Georgia,(1831), was a United States Supreme Court case. The Cherokee Nation sought a federal injunction against laws passed by the U.S. state of Georgia depriving them of rights within its boundaries, but the Supreme Court did not hear the case on its merits. It ruled that it had no original jurisdiction in the matter, as the Cherokees were a dependent nation, with a relationship to the United States like that of a "ward to its guardian," as said by Justice Marshall.

Palko v. Connecticut

Play Episode Listen Later May 6, 2018 12:59


Defendant Palko is tried and convicted of murder for a second time after state appeals previous murder conviction on same events. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The double jeopardy prohibition provision included in the Fifth Amendment is not applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Helvering V Davis

Play Episode Listen Later May 5, 2018 20:10


A decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that Social Security was constitutionally permissible as an exercise of the federal power to spend for the general welfare, and did not contravene the 10th Amendment. The Court's 7-2 decision defended the constitutionality of the Social Security Act of 1935, requiring only that welfare spending be for the common benefit as distinguished from some mere local purpose. It affirmed a District Court decree that held that the tax upon employees was not properly at issue, and that the tax upon employers was constitutional.

Steward Machine Co. v. Davis

Play Episode Listen Later May 5, 2018 73:24


A case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the unemployment compensation provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935, which established a federal taxing structure that was designed to induce states to adopt laws for funding and payment of unemployment compensation. The decision signaled the Court's acceptance of a broad interpretation of Congressional power to influence state laws.

Carter v. Carter Coal Co.

Play Episode Listen Later May 2, 2018 111:04


A United States Supreme Court decision interpreting the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, which permits the United States Congress to "regulate Commerce... among the several States." Specifically, it analyzes the extent of Congress’ power, according to the Commerce Clause, looking at whether or not they have the right to regulate manufacturing.

Baldwin v. G.A.F. Seelig, Inc.

Play Episode Listen Later May 2, 2018 17:58


A United States Supreme Court case which held that a state may not regulate intrastate prices by prohibiting the importation of less expensive goods in interstate commerce. It established the principle that one state, in its dealings with another, cannot place itself in economic isolation.

A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States

Play Episode Listen Later May 2, 2018 60:42


A decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated regulations of the poultry industry according to the nondelegation doctrine and as an invalid use of Congress' power under the commerce clause. This was a unanimous decision that rendered the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933, a main component of President Roosevelt's New Deal, unconstitutional.

Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 29, 2018 172:06


Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 1819, was a landmark decision in United States corporate law from the United States Supreme Court dealing with the application of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution to private corporations. The case arose when the president of Dartmouth College was deposed by its trustees, leading to the New Hampshire legislature attempting to force the college to become a public institution and thereby place the ability to appoint trustees in the hands of the governor of New Hampshire. The Supreme Court upheld the sanctity of the original charter of the college, which pre-dated the creation of the State. The decision settled the nature of public versus private charters and resulted in the rise of the American business corporation and the American free enterprise system.

Rhode Island v. Innis

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 29, 2018 35:34


Rhode Island v. Innis, is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that clarifies what constitutes "interrogation" for the purposes of Miranda warnings. Under Miranda v. Arizona, police are forbidden from interrogating a suspect once he has asserted his right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment. In Innis, the court held that interrogation is not just direct questioning but also its "functional equivalent"; namely, "any words or actions on the part of the police ... that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response."

Harris v New York

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 29, 2018 14:20


Harris (defendant) was arrested for selling drugs to an undercover police officer. At trial, Harris testified. During cross examination, the prosecution attempted to impeach Harris’ earlier testimony by asking questions about unwarned statements Harris made following arrest. The jury was instructed that the statements could only be used to assess Harris’ credibility. The statements were not used during the prosecution’s case in chief. Both attorneys discussed the statements during closing arguments. Harris was found guilty. In a per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals of New York affirmed the conviction. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Sherman Antitrust Act 1890

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 26, 2018 5:09


education

Miranda v. Arizona

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 26, 2018 156:46


Miranda v. Arizona by Timur Boltaev

Закон О Недрах

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 3, 2018 241:34


Закон О Недрах by Timur Boltaev

Договоры и односторонние сделки // Сделки, представительство, исковая давность

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 13, 2018 18:47


Договоры и односторонние сделки // Сделки, представительство, исковая давность by Timur Boltaev

Понятие сделки // Сделки, представительство, исковая давность

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 13, 2018 85:19


Понятие сделки // Сделки, представительство, исковая давность by Timur Boltaev

Предисловие от ответственного редактора // Сделки, представительство, исковая давность

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 7, 2018 12:14


Предисловие от ответственного редактора // Сделки, представительство, исковая давность by Timur Boltaev

Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 19, 2017 16:40


Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen by Timur Boltaev

Thoburn v. Sunderland City Council

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 12, 2017 119:19


Thoburn v. Sunderland City Council by Timur Boltaev

ФЗ О ГК Росатом

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 7, 2017 135:19


ФЗ О ГК Росатом by Timur Boltaev

Правила дорожного движения

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 7, 2017 241:55


Правила дорожного движения by Timur Boltaev

Об обществах с ограниченной ответственностью

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 7, 2017 216:32


Об обществах с ограниченной ответственностью by Timur Boltaev

A company's member's legal status - U.K. Company's Act 2006 - part 8

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 30, 2017 41:27


A company's member's legal status - U.K. Company's Act 2006 - part 8 by Timur Boltaev

OFAC FAQs Other Sanctions Programs

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2017 101:49


OFAC FAQs Other Sanctions Programs by Timur Boltaev

OFAC FAQs Iran Sanctions

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2017 215:03


OFAC FAQs Iran Sanctions by Timur Boltaev

OFAC FAQs General Questions

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2017 58:16


OFAC FAQs General Questions by Timur Boltaev

Marrakesh Declaration Of 15 April 1994 // WTO

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 19, 2017 6:28


Marrakesh Declaration Of 15 April 1994 // WTO by Timur Boltaev

R (Al Rabbat) V WMC

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 1, 2017 20:36


R (Al Rabbat) V WMC by Timur Boltaev

The DAO // report of investigation by the SEC

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 27, 2017 56:27


The DAO // report of investigation by the SEC by Timur Boltaev

Air Jamaica V Roy Charlton

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 22, 2017 47:33


Air Jamaica V Roy Charlton by Timur Boltaev

RFC 2012 Plc Appellant V Advocate General For Scotland Respondent

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 17, 2017 81:08


RFC 2012 Plc Appellant V Advocate General For Scotland Respondent by Timur Boltaev

Entick V Carrington

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 59:10


Entick V Carrington by Timur Boltaev

Chapter 12

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 31:16


Chapter 12 by Timur Boltaev

Chapter 11

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 48:52


Chapter 11 by Timur Boltaev

Chapter 10

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 34:39


Chapter 10 by Timur Boltaev

Chapter 9

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 78:15


Chapter 9 by Timur Boltaev

Chapter 8

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 40:49


Chapter 8 by Timur Boltaev

Chapter 7

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2017 64:38


Chapter 7 by Timur Boltaev

Claim Audilex

In order to claim this podcast we'll send an email to with a verification link. Simply click the link and you will be able to edit tags, request a refresh, and other features to take control of your podcast page!

Claim Cancel