Sentences with phrase «court reasons for judgment»

Not exact matches

The most significant reason for optimism is that the Supreme Court itself has made a number of decisions recently that protect religious freedom of institutions, not just of individuals, notably the 2012 Hosanna - Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC judgment, which was unanimous.

I share the view expressed by objective and reasonable members of the public that because the government was the 1st defendant / respondent against whom the Supreme Court made declarations of unconstitutional conduct in paying the judgment debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the government has been pretending for purely political reasons at each turn to take steps to enforce the judgment and orders of the court only to deliberately abort Court made declarations of unconstitutional conduct in paying the judgment debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the government has been pretending for purely political reasons at each turn to take steps to enforce the judgment and orders of the court only to deliberately abort court only to deliberately abort them.

They ought to be warned that their modus operandi will not lead to reasoned dialogue and reconciliation with me but may push me to invoke my right pursuant to Article 2 and 130 of the Constitution so that the Supreme Court may settle once and for all whether or not under Article 55 of the Constitution a political party can gag a citizen from defending, and upholding the Constitution demonstrated with a Supreme Court judgment simply because he is perceived to be a member of that political party.

«The issue before the trial court was whether the 1st respondent (PDP) can rubbish the judgment / order of the court for whatever reason and set up a caretaker committee, other claims notwithstanding.

In giving her judgment in the case, Her Lordship Barbara Ackah - Yensu pointed out that: «I find both 2nd and 3rd defendants, particularly Catherine Afeku, not to be credible witness and they mounted the witness box to tell the Court a pack of lies, and it is for this reason that I preferred the evidence of plaintiff that she never saw the company's regulations».

The court did not provide reasons for its judgment but noted that detailed reasons for the verdict would be provided on February 12.

The court did not provide reasons for its judgment but noted that detailed reasons for -LSB-...]

(c) Violation of 14th Amendment procedural due process The court granted the defendants» motion for summary judgment for this claim, finding that Ms. I did not meet the applicable precedent, which requires at the threshold an allegation that the reason for the forced discharge was to avoid a pre-termination hearing.

(2) signed by an individual, or his parent, to the effect that he has been denied admission to or not permitted to continue in attendance at a public college by reason of race, color, religion, or national origin, and the Attorney General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution of an action will materially further the orderly achievement of desegregation in public education, the Attorney General is authorized, after giving notice of such complaint to the appropriate school board or college authority and after certifying that he is satisfied that such board or authority has had a reasonable time to adjust the conditions alleged in such complaint, to institute for or in the name of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district court of the United States against such parties and for such relief as may be appropriate, and such court shall have and shall exercise jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section, provided that nothing herein shall empower any official or court of the United States to issue any order seeking to achieve a racial balance in any school by requiring the transportation of pupils or students from one school to another or one school district to another in order to achieve such racial balance, or otherwise enlarge the existing power of the court to insure compliance with constitutional standards.

The higher courts in Australia, who had passed the last judgment in favor of Samsung would also like to see the reasons for their judgment being appealed against and being sustained even though temporarily.

The court will take into account how quickly you made the application and may want to know the reason for any delay, e.g. you only just found out about the judgment.

The order just entered by the Virginia Supreme Court was simply a formal statement for the record that, for the reasons stated in the April Opinion rendered by the Supreme Court, the trial court's judgment was affiCourt was simply a formal statement for the record that, for the reasons stated in the April Opinion rendered by the Supreme Court, the trial court's judgment was affiCourt, the trial court's judgment was afficourt's judgment was affirmed.

It can be argued that the judgment in Jia is already sufficiently clear to answer the first question as the Court had clearly stated there that «there is no need to determine the reasons for recourse to that support or to raise the question whether the person concerned is able to support himself by taking up paid employment» (para. 36).

Counsel for both parties declined an offer to poll the jury, and both parties replied negatively when asked by the trial court if there was «any reason that this should not be entered as a verdict and a judgment at this time.»

While we would have reservations about the Court's reasoning (for an excellent analysis, see Cathryn Costello's article) and might have hoped for a position closer to that adopted by AG Trstenjak, who posited that a State has a duty to take responsibility for the asylum seeker if a Dublin transfer would expose them to serious risk of violating (any) fundamental rights, its judgment represents important progress.

However, the Court held that this conduct was still relevant to the issue of risk of dissipation by effectively reasoning that if Mr Grigorishin could transfer away assets for one reason, he could do it for other reasons, including to avoid paying the judgment.

On 1 March 2016 the Court of Justice of the European Union gave its judgment in the joined cases of Ibrahim Alo and Amira Osso, Cases C - 443 / 14 and C - 444 / 14, ruling that the EU's Qualification Directive does not sanction the imposition of restrictions of the freedom of movement for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, and that such a limitation is not justifiable for reasons of territorial sharing of social assistance burdens, while at the same time leaving it up to the referring German Federal Administrative Court to decide whether the limitation can be justified for reasons of migration and integration policy.

However, the General Court accepted Gifi's argument that the Board failed to examine all the evidence it had produced, and the Board's judgment did not mention several of the designs cited: «In the present case, it is clear that, in the light of the Board of Appeal's assertion that it was required to re-examine the application for a declaration of invalidity in its entirety, followed by a one - by - one examination of the contested design in relation only to Designs D 1 to D 17, it is impossible to infer from the wording of the contested decision, or the context in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into account Designs D 18 to D 22.»

Reasons for judgment were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, excluding an expert report for failing to disclose a list of documents reviewed.

In reasons for judgment released today, the BC Court of Appeal overturned the order of a Master denying the defendant costs thrown away in circumstances where the plaintiff was successful in obtaining an adjournment of an impending trial.

[4] In the reasons for judgment of the Court of Appeal, Justice Hourigan agreed with the motions judge that the «occurrence» causing property damage in this case was the scratching of the windows caused by the contractor's employees and not the presence of airborne cement debris.

In reasons for judgment released this week, the court in Glover v. Leakey, 2017 BCSC 1287, awarded special costs against ICBC due to the filing of inconsistent pleadings in two separate actions.

In reasons for judgment released this week, the Court of Appeal in Donaldson v. Dorworth, 2017 BCCA 236, dismissed the plaintiff's appeal of the trial judge's decision to uphold the defence jury notice.

Reasons for judgment were released today by the BC Supreme Court (Mariano v. Campbell) awarding a Plaintiff just over $ 115,000 as a result of injuries sustained in a 2006 rear end collision.

It is, in fact, impossible to find the reasons for judgment of the Court of Appeal, using this style of cause, on either the Court's own website (even when you know the date of the decision) or through CanLII — or, for that matter QL or WestLaw.

(Please note the case discussed in this post was overturned by the BC Court of Appeal in reasons for judgment released on September 21, 2010.

The Supreme Court of Canada this morning released its reasons for judgment in BCE Inc. v. 1976 Debentureholders, 2008 SCC 69.

The Court of Appeal's reasons for judgment (from which the application was made), dismissing an application for leave to appeal to it, can be found under Re Ivaco Inc. (2007 ONCA 746).

Reasons for judgment were released today by the BC Supreme Court addressing whether a witness who has a good understanding of English should have their credibility negatively assessed where they choose to testify trough an interpreter.

Concern is expressed that the reasons for judgment of many provincial courts now show a preponderance of citations to cases from the same province.

Sir Andrew Morritt, who gave the only reasoned judgment in the Court of Appeal, confirmed that it is not possible for a planning authority to authorise a nuisance, although the effect of a planning permission may be to alter the character of a neighbourhood for the purposes of assessing the question of nuisance.

For this reason, the district court's entry of summary judgment for Bryant on these claims was impropFor this reason, the district court's entry of summary judgment for Bryant on these claims was impropfor Bryant on these claims was improper.

The Court may set aside the judgment for any of the reasons given above.

On appeal, the plaintiffs assert that the trial court erred in entering summary judgment for two reasons.

Reasons for judgment were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, finding a formal offer that was bested by 9 % and was delivered a few days prior to trial was capable of triggering double costs.

The dissenting judgment, written by Justice Fish, argued that the power to determine the compensation to be paid amici flowed from courts» inherent jurisdiction and need to control its own processes for three reasons:

Reasons for judgment in New Mex are not publicly available so it is not known how much weight the court may have given any potential aggravating factor.

(i) A freezing order will be granted more readily after judgment than before; it is sufficient for the grant of relief that there is a real risk that the judgment will remain unsatisfied if injunctive relief is refused; (ii) there is no reason why the court should not exercise a power to appoint a receiver by way of equitable execution over future receipts from a defined asset.

Rule of Law Court of Appeal Dismisses Appeal in Scholz v. Scholz In reasons for judgment released on June 23, 2013, the Court of Appeal dismissed Ruth Scholz's appeal in Scholz v. Scholz, 2013 BCCA 309.

The Hague Convention also permits a Court to refuse to enforce a judgment for a broader range of reasons than is the case under the Recast Regulation.

[35] Before the practice developed of posting all judgments of the court below on the internet and thereby saving them for posterity, I would not have considered it necessary to express such a caveat, as the reasons for judgment below would have disappeared into obscurity.»

While the Court of Appeal in Denton declined to provide a list of good and bad reasons for compliance it approved the examples previously given in para 41 of the judgment in Mitchell.

The reasons given for a court's judgment, frequently pointing out the law that governed the court's conclusions.

The full judgment of the Supreme Court, per Karakatsanis J. is: «The majority of the Court is of the view that the appeal should be dismissed, substantially for the reasons of Harrington J.A., 2015 NLCA 60, 371 Nfld.

Looking at the judgment in the appeal case, it is quite clear what the Court wanted to convey to the Parliament: you can not disregard a citizen's petition in such a way that you either refuse to consider it completely or you provide such an insufficient reasoning that the petitioner has no clue on the reasons for the rejection.

The Court largely upheld this reasoning in its judgment on appeal, recalling that the Leipzig - Halle airport was in competition with other regional airports to become DHL's European hub for air freight (paragraph 40 of the judgment).

All are unanimous decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada in which the reasons for judgment — the explanation as to why the outcome is the legally and constitutionally appropriate one — are not attributed to any specific named judge or judges on the Supreme Court, but rather to a mysterious entity called THE CCourt of Canada in which the reasons for judgment — the explanation as to why the outcome is the legally and constitutionally appropriate one — are not attributed to any specific named judge or judges on the Supreme Court, but rather to a mysterious entity called THE CCourt, but rather to a mysterious entity called THE COURTCOURT.

In the course of drafting reasons for judgment it was discovered that two judgments of this court relied on by the appellant had been the subject of adverse comment in the judgment of the House of Lords in Rush & Tompkins Ltd. v. Greater London Council and another, [1988] 3 All E.R. 737.

L.R., etc., and, in particular, on - line resources, there are now enough easily accessible decisions from all provinces — perhaps not in P.E.I., though I haven't checked — that in many reasons for judgment at both the trial level and court of appeal the only decisions referred to are from the province in which the court sits.

Reasons for judgment were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, dismissing a plaintiff request to strike a jury notice in an ICBC injury claim.