Sentences with phrase «appeal judge lady»

Court of Appeal judge Lady Justice Hallett (pictured) will preside over the courtroom, with John Kelsey - Fry QC of Cloth Fair Chambers and Two Hare Court's Sallie Bennett - Jenkins QC serving as the defence, opposite Cloth Fair's Ian Winter QC and Two Hare Court's Jonathan Laidlaw QC for the prosecution.

Sallie Bennett - Jenkins QC is among a line - up of high - profile criminal barristers who will take to the stage this Sunday (29 April) for a charity performance of the Trial of Richard III, presided over by Court of Appeal judge Lady Justice Hallett.

Not exact matches

Well, I don't find Lady Gaga appealing, so I guess I'm a poor judge of sexy.

The Home Office had appealed the ruling by Lady Justice Hallett in November, but this appeal was struck down by a High Court judge.

Although the Court dismissed the appeals: · the judgement was not unanimous, with two judges — Lord Kerr and Lady Hale — expressing support for the arguments made by the appellants and the BHA.

However, the Court of Appeal, with Lady Justice Arden giving the judgment, rejected MGN's argument that the judge had made no finding, as required by CPR 36.17 (3), that it would be «unjust» for the normal consequences of failing to beat an offer to apply.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, and accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against conviction dismissed — Although trial judge did not address analytical steps in order, he properly analyzed evidence and concluded that injuries sustained by victim were not accidental and could not have occurred in any other fashion than as stated by victim — Having provided reasons for accepting victim's evidence, trial judge was entitled to reject accused's evidence — Trial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resulted.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against sentence was allowed — Trial judge erred in concluding that discharge was not appropriate in circumstances, especially given conclusion that accused did not deliberately attempt to injure victim — Trial judge found that there was no need for either specific deterrence or general deterrence; prime concern was need for denunciation of her conduct — Section 730 of Criminal Code permits discharge in cases of this nature, provided that it was in best interest of accused and not contrary to public interest — Accused was responsible individual with no record whatsoever, she held position as counsellor and social worker for 25 years — Trial judge did not find that conviction would definitely affect her employment, but possibility existed, and such conviction would necessarily result in criminal record — There was no likelihood of re-offending — Conditional discharge would not be contrary to public interest.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed against order to provide DNA sample — Appeal allowed — Order was issued to destroy DNA sample that was taken — Trial judge erred in failing to exercise discretion not to order DNA sample — Accused was first time offender, in circumstances that resulted in serious injuries, but with no intention of causing those injuries — Accused had otherwise been exemplary citizen, and likelihood of re-offending was remote.

Social mobility in the legal profession, commissioned by the legal communications specialist Byfield Consultancy, draws on interviews with lawyers at all stages of their careers from those starting out such as Subashini Nathan, presently a paralegal for a legal aid firm, through to Lady Justice Hallett, the fifth woman to sit as an Appeal judge.

Senior judges have also made their voices heard, portraying the most recent cuts in strong language: the new President of the Supreme Court, Lady Justice Hale, described them as probably «a false economy»; Lady Justice Hallett, a senior Court of Appeal judge, said they had created a «huge burden» on judges, lawyers and litigants; while Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division, called them «shaming».

In 2007, he was appointed a Judicial Assistant to the Court of Appeal (Lady Justice Arden), which gave him an invaluable insight into the way judges decide cases and appellate work.

Granting Perry's appeal, Lady Justice Gloster held: «In my judgment, the judge was wholly wrong, both as a matter of principle and in the particular circumstances of this case, to have engaged in the kind of factual determination which he did as to whether, on the balance of probabilities, Mr Perry could have brought an «honest» services claim.

She points to Gibson & Ors v Sheffield City Council [2010] EWCA Civ 63 where earlier this year the Appeal judges backed the unions» claim that carers, care workers and dinner ladies working in Sheffield were entitled to the same bonus payments as men, This ruling, in the view of the union, is «opening the door for thousands of women» to pursue claims.