Sentences with phrase «adverse inferences if»

Tribunals can draw adverse inferences if information is not provided or is evasive or equivocal.

By requiring the plaintiff to disclose the very fact of her attendance before a medical expert, and run the risk of an adverse inference if she did not call the expert at trial, the master was also interfering with the plaintiff's right to elect which witnesses to call.

Not exact matches

Subsequently, by virtue of defining that an adult and infant are unable to safely sleep on the same surface together, such as what occurs during bedsharing, even when all known adverse bedsharing risk factors are absent and safe bedsharing practices involving breastfeeding mothers are followed, an infant that dies while sharing a sleeping surface with his / her mother is labeled a SUID, and not SIDS.26 In this way the infant death statistics increasingly supplement the idea that bedsharing is inherently and always hazardous and lend credence, artificially, to the belief that under no circumstance can a mother, breastfeeding or not, safely care for, or protect her infant if asleep together in a bed.27 The legitimacy of such a sweeping inference is highly problematic, we argue, in light of the fact that when careful and complete examination of death scenes, the results revealed that 99 % of bedsharing deaths could be explained by the presence of at least one and usually multiple independent risk factors for SIDS such as maternal smoking, prone infant sleep, use of alcohol and / or drugs by the bedsharing adults.28 Moreover, this new ideology is especially troubling because it leads to condemnations of bedsharing parents that border on charges of being neglectful and / or abusive.

The claim did also highlight the risk respondents face if they fail to adduce evidence on matters within their own knowledge (in this case those accused of wrongdoing were not called) with the EAT stating that the Tribunal may draw adverse inferences in such situations.

It is important to remember that while the act of transferring ESI can be seen by some as a simple, innocuous act there are real implications if done wrong which can include sanctions, adverse inference and other significant results.

If the privilege is available, advantages of asserting the privilege include that the client may be prevented from making statements in a civil proceeding that could be used against him or her in future criminal or civil proceedings or private civil litigation.82 In addition, testifying in a civil or criminal proceeding may, under certain circumstances, amount to a waiver of the Fifth Amendment privilege for purposes of the same proceeding and any future proceedings.83 Conversely, risks of asserting the privilege include that adverse inferences may, under certain circumstances, be drawn in civil or administrative proceedings from an individual's assertion of Fifth Amendment rights in a prior civil or administrative proceeding.84 Moreover, an individual's assertion of the privilege in a civil proceeding could factor into law enforcement's charging decisions.

Even if I were to apply any adverse inference I would not know what that inference would be other than the opinion would be no different than all the evidence I have heard.

If there is a possible adverse inference that can be drawn for failing to call a witness, you should weigh the risks against the benefits and decide accordingly.

The law draws an adverse inference against franchisees, even penalizes them, if they choose to come to court with these outstanding financial issues.

The court offered the following by way of observation: ``... it seems to me that courts are at risk of falling into the error into which this court fell if in a potential section 34 case they simply ask themselves the question: are we entitled to draw an adverse inference?»

In short a judge may not must apply the adverse inference principle in deciding if the defendant was negligent and caused damages to the plaintiff in a Surrey Vancouver medical malpractice claim.

Importantly, the Tribunal refused to draw an adverse inference against the complainant, stating that the employer could have called the complainant's doctor if it wished to do so.

In federal courts, if a case is being heard under diversity jurisdiction (plaintiff and defendant are from different states but the claim is not a federal claim) the state rule is supposed to apply; if the claim is a federal claim, the federal rule applies and adverse inferences are allowed.

Counsel submitted that the adverse inference was appropriately drawn if relevant evidence was destroyed in the face of pending or reasonably foreseeable litigation.