Upon consent of both parties, parents may submit to the court a parenting plan to determine physical and legal custody of the child.
The self - determination requirement of mediator ethics appears to make the nature of the process in each case, as well as the substantive decisions, dependent
upon the consent of the parties.
Not exact matches
By entering, each entrant warrants and represents the following with respect to their Submission: (a) entrant is the sole and exclusive owner
of the Submission; (b) the Submission is entrant's own creation and is 100 % original; (c) the Submission will not infringe on any rights
of any third
parties; and (d) any third
party whose person or property appears in the Submission has given entrant appropriate written
consent (which shall be provided to Sponsor
upon request thereof) for such person or property to be filmed and used as permitted herein.
And, in the last article, it is declared that it shall take effect and be obligatory
upon the contracting
parties as soon as the same shall have been ratified by the President
of the United States, with the advice and
consent of the Senate, thereby showing the early opinion
of the government
of the character
of the Cherokee Nation.
The Decision - Maker alone may be appointed in a family dispute, or may be appointed in addition to the appointment
of a Parenting Coordinator or an Arbitrator (see below) at any time after the entry
of an order concerning parental responsibilities and
upon written
consent of both
parties.
At any stage
of the arbitral proceedings, if all
parties agree on settlement
of any aspect
of the dispute,
upon request, the arbitrator may memorialize the agreement in a
Consent Award in consultation with the
parties» counsel.
More specifically, Commission start is
of the view that implied
consent can not be relied
upon to send commercial electronic messages on behalf
of unknown third
parties, without obtaining prior specific express
consent in accordance with the Act, Regulations and Regulations (CRTC);
In the above examples, if the
parties wanted arbitration
of disputes to be permissive and non-mandatory, they could have clarified their contract by including more explicit language (i.e., «any and all disputes,
upon mutual agreement, may be arbitrated» or «with the
consent of the other
party, either
party may commence arbitration»).
The Committee especially calls
upon State
parties to recognise and protect the rights
of indigenous peoples to own, develop, control and use their communal lands, territories and resources and, where they have been deprived
of their lands and territories traditionally owned or otherwise inhabited or used without their free and informed
consent, to take steps to return these lands and territories.
(b) If a
party is found to be indigent based
upon the factors in s. 57.082, the court may not order the
party to parenting coordination unless public funds are available to pay the indigent
party's allocated portion
of the fees and costs or the nonindigent
party consents to paying all
of the fees and costs.
Similarly, the Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination has, in its General Recommendation No 23, called
upon parties to the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms
of Racial Discrimination [6] to ensure that that no decisions directly relating to the rights and interests
of indigenous peoples are taken without their informed
consent.
Standard RI P&S allows you to assign the contract - it is # 26 on the contract and it states» this contract may be assigned by either
party w / o written
consent of the other, and shall be binding
upon the assigns
of buyer and seller»
107 DOS 98 Matter
of DOS v. Sosis - subject matter jurisdiction; due process; failure to appear at hearing; proper business practices; deposits; fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden
of proof; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction if at the time the disciplinary proceeding was commenced by proper service
of a notice
of hearing and complaint the
party was (i) licensed to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (ii) an applicant for either a license or for the renewal
of a license to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (iii) eligible to automatically renew the prior license under the two - year limitation provision
of RPL § 441 (2); ex parte hearing is permissible
upon proof
of proper notice
of hearing; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction where
party was licensed at the time proceeding was commenced and, where at time
of hearing, although not licensed was eligible to automatically apply to renew pursuant to RPL § 441 (2); licensee operated a real estate brokerage business under an unlicensed name; licensee unlawfully retains deposit funds after deposit monies were delivered on the condition that same were to be disbursed only on the principal's
consent and approval and said
consent and approval was not given; licensee's illegal exercise
of right
of ownership over his principal's funds spawns conversion and constitutes a fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden
of proof to establish licensee failed to deposit trust funds in a segregated escrow account, engaged in fraud and changed business location without notice to DOS; restitution ordered in the amount
of $ 1,900 plus interest, fine
of $ 1,000 and any further application for licensure shall not be considered until applicant pays said fine and provides proof
of payment
of restitution
73 DOS 95 Matter
of DOS v. Marotta - consolidation
of actions; dual agency; disgorgement
of broker commission; broker may act concurrently in a single transaction as an agent and a principal with informed
consent of and full disclosure to principal; broker's agreement breached by broker where broker obtained property incompatible with client's stated needs; no broker's fee earned where brokerage agreement breached by broker; broker engaging in business under trade name acts as individual; agency created between broker and buyer by conduct
of parties; dual agency allowed
upon full disclosure and informed
consent of both buyer and seller; no commission earned by broker where breach
of fiduciary duty; refund unearned commissions