Welcome to Court Search
International

Litigation research specialists.

With over thirty years of experience in providing clients with specialist investigative services, the founders of Court Search have now created the ultimate solution for International court litigation research, providing global coverage in identifying both current and historic court matters regarding both individuals and corporate entities

Our specialist legal research combines cutting edge technology, a global reach and most importantly a wealth of experience in the understanding and provision of specialist legal research.

Our clients include legal practices, corporate entities including globally recognised blue chip corporations and the private sector. 

Our research


Court search international offer unique International litigation intelligence including, but not subject to:


Business & Commercial Litigation

Family Case Law
Patent Litigation
Civil Litigation
Media Litigation
Public Interest Litigation
Construction litigation

Criminal Case Research (Including full DBS Checks)

Personal Injury Litigation

International Investigation


Court Search are Legal Research Specialists offering clients worldwide with timely, cost effective research and resources that ensures an accelerated process and turnaround on required legal support. The end result is in an efficient proactive course of action for your legal practice and clients

We are fully aware of the importance of identifying litigation matters for various reasons from assisting an investigation such as a full due diligence background enquiry to the identification of Asset related matters.

Our research has assisted numerous clients who have used our services prior to engaging in a business contract and others who have entered into litigation with either an individual and/or a company. There are many types of inquiries where identifying litigation matters can be key to a successful outcome.

Court Search International are established Litigation Research Specialists maintaining active databases compiled over thirty years. We provide cost effective solutions regardless of complexity.

 

Our Reach

Court Research International can research and identify Case matters from all Courts including High Courts, Supreme Courts and Criminal Courts worldwide. Our criminal record research is conducted within the confines of the new GDPR legislation and all information can be presented in a Court of Law. 

For further information on how to get the best out of our services please feel free to visit our what we do page and how we do it.


Learn More
 
The latest news...

Crime & Consequences Crime and criminal law

  • A Report and a Critique on Nitrogen Hypoxia Executions
    by Kent Scheidegger

    Scientific American has this report by Dana Smith on execution via nitrogen hypoxia. Dudley Sharp has this critique of the article. As Mr. Sharp notes, all of the people interviewed by Ms. Smith for the article are opponents of the death penalty. As is standard practice in journalism now, opponents of the death penalty are not identified as such. The Death Penalty Information Center’s misleading self-identification is repeated uncritically in the article: “a national nonprofit that provides information and analysis on death penalty issues.” This Soros-funded organization filters and colors the information it provides to support only anti-death-penalty arguments, but you would never know that from the way it is routinely identified in the press. Some of the comments are misleading and some border on silly. Among the latter, an anesthesiologist criticizes the coining of a new term, “nitrogen hypoxia,” as “a made-up two-word expression meant to sound like you’re on the bridge of the starship Enterprise.” For the record, I am a Star Trek fan of long standing, and the term never once made me think of the Enterprise. There is absolutely nothing wrong with coining a new term for a new procedure or invention. “Television” is a made-up word unknown in the nineteenth century. “Smart phone” is a more recent coined term for a more recent invention. Anything wrong with either of those? The article uses the opponents’ favorite word, “suffocate,” but that is a term likely to mislead regular folks, regardless of whether it is technically accurate. When we hear that term, we think of someone with a pillow pressed over their face, unable to exhale and with the extreme distress caused by the resulting carbon dioxide build-up. Nitrogen hypoxia allows normal exhalation and thus avoids that distress, just like the low-pressure hypoxia that every Air Force flight training student (including me) has gone through. Been there, done that; it doesn’t hurt a bit. The head of the DPIC chimes in with this beauty: “And as far as anyone can tell, no one has considered the potentially lethal danger to execution personnel if [they] don’t carry it out properly.” * * * “Nitrogen is colorless, and it is odorless, and the same thing that led the Oklahoma legislature to think that this would be swift and painless—the fact that people were unaware that they were being poisoned at depth or at altitude—those very same factors could make it potentially lethal if gas leaks into areas where the execution team was,” Dunham says. No one has considered it? Yes, those of us who understand basic physics (I have a bachelors degree in it, BTW) have considered it and consider this laughable. Nitrogen is not toxic. It is nearly 3/4 of the air we breathe all the time. It becomes lethal only if its concentration is so high that it displaces the oxygen needed to sustain life. If a room is reasonably large and well ventilated, the notion that a leak from a mask could release a large enough... The post A Report and a Critique on Nitrogen Hypoxia Executions appeared first on Crime & Consequences.

  • Philadelphia murder rates rise due to lenient sentences sought by progressive prosecutor Larry Krasner
    by Elizabeth Berger

    As the progressive prosecutor movement grows in popularity, we see more and more policy changes that reduce penalties for certain crimes. One of the common themes is de-prosecution, or the discretionary decision to not prosecute certain criminal offenses. Another aspect of de-prosecution involves reducing the severity of punishment for individuals who are prosecuted. The movement came about due to the belief of many progressives that mass incarceration actually increases crime through supposed “criminogenic” effects. That is, they believe that people who serve long periods of time in prison will adapt to that culture and learn certain behaviors that will make them worse criminals. However, opponents argue that the policies don’t hold offenders sufficiently accountable, which will only encourage more crime as offenders learn that there are little to no consequences for their behavior. In Philadelphia, de-prosecution began with District Attorney Seth Williams in 2015. This resulted in a substantial decline in both new cases prosecuted and sentencings (particularly for drug possession, drug trafficking, and felony possession of firearms), a trend that accelerated when District Attorney Larry Krasner took office in 2018. At the annual Federalist Society Convention last year, Krasner boasted that his policies are “on the side of the data,” vehemently denying that de-prosecution increases crime. However, a 2022 study published in Criminology and Public Policy refuted Krasner’s claims. The study, conducted by Thomas Hogan, revealed a causal link between de-prosecution and increased homicides in Philadelphia. Hogan used data from other large cities to create a “synthetic Philadelphia” that could be used for comparison. The data were extracted from federally maintained law enforcement statistics, administrative state- and county-level data, standard economic and demographic factors, and public-source data regarding prosecutiorial regimes. Administrative court data were used to track the number of prosecutions while Sentencing Commission data were used to track the number of sentences. In addition, homicide data was gathered from the supplemental homicide data (SHR) collected by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR). Homicide data were very detailed and included information on victim, offender, and case characteristics. Drawing from the largest 99 cities in the United States, Hogan used various sources of publically available data (e.g., agency websites, funding reports, statements to media, etc.) to categorize city prosecutor offices as progressive, traditional, or somewhere in the middle (see Table 1 of the original article for a listing of cities). Offices were coded as “progressive” based on a checklist representing the 15 most salient factors associated with progressive prosecutors (per past research). To qualify as progressive, the prosecutor was required to meet at least 10 of the 15. These factors included things like stated intention to prosecute fewer cases, preferences to end cash bail, support for eliminating mandatory minimums, or the belief that the criminal justice system is racist (see the full checklist in the Appendix of the original article). Among the cities without de-prosecution, cities were selected for the comparison group if they were similar to Philadelphia on certain factors (e.g., population size, median household income, existing crime rate, etc.).... The post Philadelphia murder rates rise due to lenient sentences sought by progressive prosecutor Larry Krasner appeared first on Crime & Consequences.

 

Contact

We can tailor a service to your individual requirement. For more information or to discuss further please call, email, or send us a message: