More incongruous is the video from Attorney General George Brandis, talking about his commitment to access to justice (despite great concerns about funding for Indigenous legal services), and to working with the Native Title sector (despite plans to introduce a bill to reverse the effect of
a federal court decision regarding the Noongar people), with nary an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander flag in sight nor mention of his support for changes to the Racial Discrimination Act.
Janssen Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC, 2010 FC 1123 (
Federal Court decision regarding patented medicine)
Not exact matches
The High
Court had granted the Commonwealth of Australia special leave to appeal the
decision in Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2015] FCAFC 59 (1 May 2015), in which the Full
Federal Court concluded that they should not have any
regard to the figures agreed by the parties in relation to penalties.
In the Horne v. Flores Supreme
Court decision of June 25, 2009, the
Court wrote that one basis for finding Arizona in compliance with
federal law
regarding the education of its English learners was that the state had adopted a significantly more effective instructional model for EL students, that being Structured English Immersion (SEI).
Since the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme
Court Decision in San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez, which established that public education is not a right under the
federal Constitution, state
courts have been the battlegrounds for resolving disputes
regarding public education finance systems.
The following is a collection of important
Federal Register notices,
court decisions, and legislation
regarding Part 40.
In June, a
federal court ruled that a single mother of four, whose wages were being garnished by the government over student loans she took out to attend a now - defunct college accused of fraud, was entitled to a speedy
decision regarding whether her student loans were eligible to be forgiven.
With a
decision that could have far - reaching implications, a
federal judge in California has ordered the first ever U.S.
court hearing on climate science for a «public nuisance» lawsuit, meaning that major oil and gas companies for the first time may have to go on the record
regarding what they knew about the planetary impacts of their products — and when.
At the
Federal Court of Appeal, the essential elements of the
Federal Court disposition with
regard to required accessibility were confirmed even though some elements of the first instance
decision were varied, especially to remove the declaration of infringement by the government and the disposition to the effect that the
Federal Court was keeping jurisdiction to ensure the effect of its declaration (Canada (Attorney General) v. Jodhan, 2012 FCA 161 (CanLII)-RRB-.
The adjudicator appointed under the Canada Code agreed with him but reserved judgment
regarding remedy when AECL sought judicial review of the
decision before the
Federal Court.
The U.S. Supreme
Court affirmed the Second Circuit's
decision, resolving a conflict among Circuit
Courts regarding the interplay between contractual limitations provisions required by most states» insurance laws and
federal case law
regarding accrual of ERISA claims.
A recent
decision of the
Federal Court of Appeal («FCA») has muddied the waters
regarding the role of the administrative tribunals in Crown - Aboriginal consultation and effectively diminished the duty of tribunals to assess the adequacy of Crown consultation in respect of project applications before them.
The 9th
Federal Appeal
Court's
decision regarding President Trump's ban on travel is both interesting and...
The 9th
Federal Appeal
Court's
decision regarding President Trump's ban on travel is both interesting and simultaneously predictive of the future.
On January 13, the Supreme
Court agreed to review
decisions from three
federal appellate
courts that reached different conclusions
regarding whether class action waivers in mandatory arbitration agreements between employees and...
This aspect was not subsequently addressed in the High
Court's ruling in the Wik case, and the first instance
decision on mineral rights has since been judicially doubted because of subsequent High
Court rulings about government «ownership» of resources: Justice North in the (minority of) the full
Federal Court appeal
decision in Ward - v - Western Australia observed of the
Federal Court decision in Wik that «the conclusion that the mining legislation in Queensland conferred full beneficial ownership on the crown sufficient to extinguish native title can not be
regarded as correct» (2000) 170 ALR 159 at para 843.