Sentences with phrase «appeal held»

The Court of Appeal held that the recording of the co-accused's re-enactment should not have been admitted, set aside the convictions and ordered a new trial on both counts.

The Court of Appeal held the girlfriend's evidence should not have been admitted and that the jury should have been directed it was not relevant to the charge before them.

The Court of Appeal held that in doing so the motion judge essentially disposed of the case on its merits as opposed to merely setting aside the default judgment and allowing the case to proceed defended.

For example, in a Manitoba case, the Court of Appeal held that where solicitor - client privilege was waived when defending criminal charges, privilege of the same communication was deemed to be waived for subsequent civil proceedings.

The Court of Appeal held the Trial Judge's decision to discount the claim and determination that «While the authorities are instructive they provide general guidance only» was consistent with the authorities.

The Court of Appeal held that judge should have instructed the jury to award damages based on the law as it existed and that the Ontario Drug Benefit Plan should not be considered a «contingency».

Following the recent Supreme Court decision in Creston Moly Corp. v. Sattva and Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. British Columbia, the Court of Appeal held that the standard of review of an arbitrator's decision is almost always «reasonableness» (this implies more deference to the arbitrator's decision than a standard of «correctness»).

A three - member panel of the Court of Appeal held that the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), specifically sections 7 and 9, undermine section 3 of the Occupiers» Liability Act (OLA) and,...

The Court of Appeal held that a contract must be performed in good faith, that this obligation involves performance within the reasonable expectations established by the contract, and that the trial judge was entitled to find that ADI's «tactics and motivations» were inconsistent with a good faith exercise of its obligations and contractual duties to WCI.

V. Foustanellas, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that there is another way to look at this rule.

Wandsworth London Borough Council v Vining [2017] EWCA Civ 1092, CA, July 28 2017, Times, September 26 2017 The leading case on the employment status of parks police, in which the Court of Appeal held that they have a right to consultation on redundancies.

[5] The Court of Appeal held that a contractual provision that excluded a director's breach of fiduciary duties as a ground for termination would «eviscerate the prohibition found in s. 134 (3).»

The Court of Appeal held that whether or not any name was an instrument of fraud depended on all the circumstances, including the similarity of a name to another, the intention of the defendant, and the type of trade involved.

The Court of Appeal held the LSC should not have refused to pay more than one - third of the expert's fees, in JG v The Lord Chancellor [2014] All ER (D) 192 (May), [2014] EWCA Civ 656.

Although the court was aware of the possible undermining of reasoned decision making if a tribunal could «simply offer different, better, or even contrary reasons to support its decision», the Court of Appeal held that the new argument was «not inconsistent» with the reason contained in the decision: «[i] ndeed it could be said to be implicit in it».

The Court of Appeal held that the pay protection arrangements in these cases — which favoured male employees and on the face of it therefore, indirectly discriminated against female employees — could not be justified.

The Court of Appeal held the draft order was not ultra vires and that, while it was discriminatory, the discrimination could be justified.

The Court of Appeal held by a majority (Lord Neuberger MR dissenting) that the union had complied with TULRCA 1992, s 231 by posting full results on its website, on notice boards at Heathrow and Gatwick and in news - sheets.

In Dutch Industries, a 2003 decision of the Federal Court of Appeal held that a patent application on which «small entity» payments had been incorrectly made rather than large entities was deemed abandoned.

The Court of Appeal held that such a provision violated equality laws in the UK by requiring discrimination on the basis of religion.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the but - for... [more]

The majority of the Court of Appeal held this practice amounts to a separate system of legal rules unaffected by the ordinary principles of property and company law.

In R v HTM [2006] EWCA Crim 1156, [2007] 2 All ER 665 the Court of Appeal held that the concept of foreseeability was more relevant to a determination of the issue of reasonable practicability (as opposed to whether an employee had been exposed to a risk at all).

The Court of Appeal held that the judge at first instance had erred in concentrating on the parties financial contributions to the property but emphasised the importance of a shared intention.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal held there were a number of palpable and overriding errors in the trial judge's findings of fact, and concluded the parents did not know the grandfather was a pedophile.

The Federal Court of Appeal held that whether an adjudicator has a legal obligation to consider an argument is part of his or her duty of procedural fairness — which is assessed by the courts on a standard of correctness.

Thus, the Court of Appeal held that the trial judge's findings of fact on causation were made in the absence of evidence, a processing error similar to that in other cases noted above.

The Court of Appeal held that the notices of Yim and Harvey to Talon were proper notices of rescission and dismissed the appeals.

The Court of Appeal held that the relevant consideration under s. 114 (2), CJA 2003 had been covered by the trial judge and there were no other grounds to overturn the conviction.

In Clin v Walter Lilly & Co Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 490, the English Court of Appeal held that, in the absence of express provisions, a term should be implied into an amended JCT contract to require the Employer to use «all due diligence» to obtain statutory approvals.

The judgment confirmed that although ordinarily loan repayments would be brought into account in an action by a lender against the negligent adviser, indeed this was the position maintained by the dissenting Judge, Lord Justice Davis, the majority of the Court of Appeal held that this principle did not apply in this case.

The Court of Appeal held that where amicus curiae makes a useful contribution to the analysis of issues before the court, the fact their position is «generally aligned» with that of one or the other parties is no bar.

The Court of Appeal held that the motion judge was entitled to deference and, on that basis, found no error in his conclusion.

In that case, the Court of Appeal held that photocopies of two arbitration agreements, when accompanied by a statement of truth, could amount to «certified copies» of the original arbitration agreements, as required by section 102 (1)(b).

The British Columbia Court of Appeal held in Forshaw v. Aluminex Extrusions Ltd. 7 held that the duty to mitigate is not a duty owed by the dismissed employee to the employer to reduce the amount claimed but a duty to take reasonable steps in the dismissed employee's own interests.

In allowing the dismissed employee to rely upon the oppression remedy to find the directors personally liable, the Court of Appeal held at paras. 62 and 63:

The British Columbia Court of Appeal held in Shore v Ladner Downs15 that a termination clause in an employment contract that potentially violated the statutory requirement in the future is «void from the beginning».

The Court of Appeal held that in accusing counsel of engaging in delaying tactics and threatening him with a personal order for costs, the trial judge's conduct was also suggestive of bias.

In 1990 the Ontario Court of Appeal held in Furuheim v. Bechtel Canada Ltd. 3 that an employer must show that the dismissed employee's conduct was unreasonable, not in one respect, but in all respects in order to overcome the onus of establishing a dismissed employee's failed to properly mitigate his or her damages.

While the trial judge had found that this clause encompassed a positive right of the First Nation to proffer the products of their hunting, trapping and fishing to trade, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the clause was merely a mechanism of ensuring that peace was maintained by preventing trade between the Mi» kmaq and the government's enemies.

In 2015 the British Columbia Court of Appeal held in Fredrickson v. Newtech Dental Laboratory8 that an employee was not required to accept re-employment after she had been dismissed immediately after returning from a short medical leave of absence.

This was confirmed in Alcatel Canada Inc. v. Egan11 in which the Ontario Court of Appeal held at paragraph 26:

In coming to its decision, the Court of Appeal held that the administrative law framework set out in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190 applied, rather than the «appellate» framework, as an appeal of an insurance arbitration reviews the decision of a non-judicial decision maker.

Here the Ontario Court of Appeal held that because the employee's actions were not mere errors in judgment, but intentional, numerous, dishonest acts that occurred over a period of time, and that were neither insignificant nor trivial, and given his role in the company, the employee was in breach of the employer's policies and therefore he was properly dismissed for cause.

In January 2013, an Alberta Court of Queen's bench decision on a summary conviction appeal held that maintenance logs for evidentiary breath testing instruments (such as the Intoxilyzer 5000C) must be disclosed by the Crown to an accused person on request: R. v. Kilpatrick, 2013 ABQB 5.

The Ontario Court of Appeal held in Howard v Benson Group Inc. 4 that an employee who has been dismissed prior to the end of the fixed term will be entitled to the wages and benefits he or she would have received to the end of the fixed term unless the employment contract contains an enforceable termination clause that specifies a pre-determined notice period in the event of early termination.

See R. v. Campbell, [1964] 20 O.R. 487 (C.A.) where the Ontario Court of Appeal held: «[t] o me it is inconceivable that Parliament in enacting the Combines Investigation Act [the predecessor anti-combines statute in Canada to the Competition Act] should have intended to make a person, sometimes conveniently referred to as the «principal», guilty of an offence thereby created and not bring within the scope of that offence a person who aids and abets that «principal», and, without whose aid and assistance, conceivably, the offence could not be committed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal held the fact that the building manager complied with the lead police investigator's request for information did not make him an agent of the state.

Since no regulation has imposed a maximum fee, the Federal Court of Appeal held that Rogers could not charge any fees for that work.

olding that a new statute covered cases filed before it was enacted, the Court of Appeal held that Labor Code section 98.7 does not require an employee to exhaust that statute's administrative remedies before filing suit on a claim for retaliation against a private employer.