Sentences with phrase «appeals court decision struck»

A recent federal appeals court decision struck down the requirement that minor parties offer a full - slate of candidates for statewide or countywide offices, while another court battle looms.

Not exact matches

EPA first tried to ban the use of asbestos in 1989, but its decision was struck down two years later by a federal appeals court that ruled the agency had exceeded its authority.

The case: a federal appeals court's decision to strike down Illinois» ban on carrying concealed weapons, according to the Associated Press.

Interestingly enough, because in the US you have the right to appeal to a higher court if you don't like the decision of a lower court, many times states will find very popular gun control bills struck down by a Federal court who tells them that in the pure legal sense, their gun control laws are unconstitutional.

Onjeh said, «Being dissatisfied with the ruling of the Election Petition Tribunal, which struck out my petition, I approached the Court of Appeal to set aside the decision of the lower court, and order the trial of my petiCourt of Appeal to set aside the decision of the lower court, and order the trial of my peticourt, and order the trial of my petition.

A five - man panel of the apex court led by Justice Tanko Muhammad unanimously affirmed the February 20, 2015, judgment of the Court of Appeal in Lagos which had overturned the Federal High Court's decision striking out the chacourt led by Justice Tanko Muhammad unanimously affirmed the February 20, 2015, judgment of the Court of Appeal in Lagos which had overturned the Federal High Court's decision striking out the chaCourt of Appeal in Lagos which had overturned the Federal High Court's decision striking out the chaCourt's decision striking out the charges.

Aminu Sule Lamido, the 34 year old son of former Jigawa State governor, Alhaji Sule Lamido, had his appeal struck out on Monday by an appellate court sitting in Kaduna against the decision of the Federal High Court, Kano which found him guilty of the charge of money laundering brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, court sitting in Kaduna against the decision of the Federal High Court, Kano which found him guilty of the charge of money laundering brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Court, Kano which found him guilty of the charge of money laundering brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.

In a 3 - 2 ruling on June 16, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit reversed a decision by a three - judge panel of the same court last October that had struck down the district's student - assignment policy as unconstitutionally discriminaCourt of Appeals for the 1st Circuit reversed a decision by a three - judge panel of the same court last October that had struck down the district's student - assignment policy as unconstitutionally discriminacourt last October that had struck down the district's student - assignment policy as unconstitutionally discriminatory.

Two months after a superior - court judge struck down the state's school - funding formula, the Rhode Island Senate has voted to appeal the decision.

Despite having previously struck down vouchers, in March 2014 the Arizona Supreme Court declined to review an appeals - court decision upholding the state's ESACourt declined to review an appeals - court decision upholding the state's ESAcourt decision upholding the state's ESA law.

However, in a unanimous 2016 decision, a three - judge panel on California's Court of Appeals struck down the lower court ruling and the state Supreme Court declined to hear the Court of Appeals struck down the lower court ruling and the state Supreme Court declined to hear the court ruling and the state Supreme Court declined to hear the Court declined to hear the case.

This past April, the California Court of Appeals unanimously struck down the controversial Vergara v. California decision, in which a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge ruled that five longstanding teacher protections — including a two - year probationary period for new teachers and a layoff system based on how many years one's been teaching — violated students» constitutional right to an equal education.

A lower court had struck down the plan, but the court of appeals overturned that decision in February 2013.

In a decision that strikes a blow against the federal government's controversial practice of excluding industry from consent decrees with environmental citizen groups, a practice known as «sue - and - settle,» the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the district court's approval of a consent decree between a coalition of environmental groups and several federal agencies in Conservation Northwest v. Sherman, No. 11 - 35729 (9thCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the district court's approval of a consent decree between a coalition of environmental groups and several federal agencies in Conservation Northwest v. Sherman, No. 11 - 35729 (9thcourt's approval of a consent decree between a coalition of environmental groups and several federal agencies in Conservation Northwest v. Sherman, No. 11 - 35729 (9th Cir.

A precedent - setting decision at the Ontario Court of Appeal this week strikes at the heart of client concerns over the abuse of billable hours, and provides a legal framework by which clients might be able to reject law firm fees considered excessive or unreasonable.

The United States Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a North Carolina Supreme Court decision that struck down a mandatory arbitration provision signed by a patient, who later alleged medical malpractice against his physician.

In a unanimous decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal reversed an arbitration board's decision that struck down Suncor's random drug and alcohol testing policy.

The Federal Court of Appeal struck down U.S. Steel's efforts to overturn Canadian investment law — the second such court decision to go against the company — after almost two years of procedural and legal challenges by the Pittsburgh - based comCourt of Appeal struck down U.S. Steel's efforts to overturn Canadian investment law — the second such court decision to go against the company — after almost two years of procedural and legal challenges by the Pittsburgh - based comcourt decision to go against the company — after almost two years of procedural and legal challenges by the Pittsburgh - based company.

Parliament has one year to respond to today's Ontario Court of Appeal decision that strikes the word prostitution from the definition of a common bawdy house and essentially upheld much of Superior Court Justice Susan Himel's landmark ruling on the issue.

Mr Barbulescu appealed to the ECtHR Grand Chamber, which reversed the decision, finding that Mr Barbulescu's Article 8 rights had been infringed and that previous courts had failed to strike a fair balance between the employer's and the employee's interests.

In another decision (2014 ONCA 608, dismissing appeal from 2014 ONSC 1300), the Court of Appeal agreed that the plaintiff's action against a criminal lawyer should be struck out as an abuse of prappeal from 2014 ONSC 1300), the Court of Appeal agreed that the plaintiff's action against a criminal lawyer should be struck out as an abuse of prAppeal agreed that the plaintiff's action against a criminal lawyer should be struck out as an abuse of process.

The Federal government will be appealing the British Columbia Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Criminal Code ban on assisted suicide.

Richard Wolf of USA Today has a news update headlined «Justices won't hear Okla. appeal on medical abortions; Decision comes after state Supreme Court ruled that the law, passed in 2011 but later struck down in court, would have banned all medical abortions.&rCourt ruled that the law, passed in 2011 but later struck down in court, would have banned all medical abortions.&rcourt, would have banned all medical abortions.»

The S.C.C. overturned a decision of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal and restored an arbitration board's decision striking down the policy.

The 6 - 3 decision released this morning in R v. Nur and R v. Charles upheld earlier rulings of the Ontario Court of Appeal and struck down another aspect of the federal government's crime legislation.

But the Court of Appeal decided McLellan should never have struck the claim, rendering the costs decision moot.

Along these lines, it is reasonable to suggest that the Court of Appeal's decision to state explicitly that which was not at issue before it, including «whether the pleading against the defendant Alberta could be struck as being frivolous or vexatious» (Ernst v. Alberta at para 9), reflects judicial scepticism.

In Ernst the Court of Appeal does not cite any of these Alberta cases, but rather points to the 2011 Supreme Court of Canada decision in R v Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, 2011 SCC 42, where at paras 17 to 26 the Supreme Court sets out the test to be met for a motion to strike claims for the failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

His deportation appeal was struck out because of contempt of court and SIAC rejected the argument that after its earlier decision its jurisdiction fell away to grant bail to B or to impose bail conditions.

The Court of Appeal of Quebec struck down the lower court decision, partly on the grounds that the Quebec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission (acting for Mr. Latif) failed to show the causal link between his ethnic or national origin and the discriminatory practice, and that the U.S. policy aimed at non-U.S. citizens in general and did not target Muslims or ACourt of Appeal of Quebec struck down the lower court decision, partly on the grounds that the Quebec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission (acting for Mr. Latif) failed to show the causal link between his ethnic or national origin and the discriminatory practice, and that the U.S. policy aimed at non-U.S. citizens in general and did not target Muslims or Acourt decision, partly on the grounds that the Quebec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission (acting for Mr. Latif) failed to show the causal link between his ethnic or national origin and the discriminatory practice, and that the U.S. policy aimed at non-U.S. citizens in general and did not target Muslims or Arabs.

On April 25, 2012, the Federal Government announced that they will appeal the March 26, 2012, Ontario Court of Appeal decision striking down Canada's prostitution laws, specifically, Criminal Code provisions prohibiting «keeping or using a common bawdy house» (section 210) and the «living off the avails of prostitution» provision (section 212 (1)(j)-RRB- as unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of Cappeal the March 26, 2012, Ontario Court of Appeal decision striking down Canada's prostitution laws, specifically, Criminal Code provisions prohibiting «keeping or using a common bawdy house» (section 210) and the «living off the avails of prostitution» provision (section 212 (1)(j)-RRB- as unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of CAppeal decision striking down Canada's prostitution laws, specifically, Criminal Code provisions prohibiting «keeping or using a common bawdy house» (section 210) and the «living off the avails of prostitution» provision (section 212 (1)(j)-RRB- as unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of Canada.

A majority of the Court of Appeal (Justices Bruce McDonald and Barbara Lea Veldhuis) upheld the case management judge's decision striking the appellant's statement of claim in relation to a motor vehicle accident and issuing an order for costs against him.

In a much - anticipated decision — Government of Saskatchewan v. Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, 2013 SKCA 43 — a five - member panel of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has found that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the «Charter «-RRB- does not guarantee a right to strike for unions and their members.

The motion judge, Justice Sean Dunphy, fundamentally misapplied the correct legal test on a motion to strike, as the Court of Appeal had to repeatedly state throughout the decision.

Appellate Decision: The appeal was allowed and the Court held that rather than striking down the court hearing fees, an enlarged exemption should be read in to Rule 20Court held that rather than striking down the court hearing fees, an enlarged exemption should be read in to Rule 20court hearing fees, an enlarged exemption should be read in to Rule 20 - 5.

The court was considering the beekeepers» appeal of a Federal Court decision striking the action as disclosing no reasonable cause of accourt was considering the beekeepers» appeal of a Federal Court decision striking the action as disclosing no reasonable cause of acCourt decision striking the action as disclosing no reasonable cause of action.

Canada Federal government drops Supreme Court CSIS overseas spying appeal, Canadian Press Sleeping man who admitted to raping a sleeping woman wins a new trial, Canadian Press Calgary man charged for flying in balloon rigged chair, Canadian Press United States Former Goldman Sachs programmer wins dismissal of second criminal conviction, Reuters U.S. appeals court upholds decision to strike down Puerto Rican bankruptcy law, Reuters International School teachers among people arrested for promoting Islamic State, Reuters International judge resigns from U.N. - backed war crimes trials in Cambodia, ReCourt CSIS overseas spying appeal, Canadian Press Sleeping man who admitted to raping a sleeping woman wins a new trial, Canadian Press Calgary man charged for flying in balloon rigged chair, Canadian Press United States Former Goldman Sachs programmer wins dismissal of second criminal conviction, Reuters U.S. appeals court upholds decision to strike down Puerto Rican bankruptcy law, Reuters International School teachers among people arrested for promoting Islamic State, Reuters International judge resigns from U.N. - backed war crimes trials in Cambodia, Recourt upholds decision to strike down Puerto Rican bankruptcy law, Reuters International School teachers among people arrested for promoting Islamic State, Reuters International judge resigns from U.N. - backed war crimes trials in Cambodia, Reuters

The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a decision to strike a defamation claim against a well - known personal injury lawyer in London, Ont., over statements about a case against a local obstetrician and gynecologist.

Following our previous Slaw post, where we commented that the Federal Government decided to appeal the June 15 British Columbia Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Criminal Code ban on physician - assisted suicide, and seeking to stay all aspect of the decision, including the exemption order found in the ruling.

However, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision to strike out the negligence claim relating to psychiatric harm (paras [44]- [45].

In that decision, the court dismissed an appeal by three residents of Ecuador from a decision striking their claims against Copper Mesa Mining Corporation («Copper Mesa» or the «Company») and two of its directors (the «Directors»).

The regulations were enacted in response to the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in R. v. Parker (2000), 49 O.R. (3d) 481 (C.A.), in which the criminal prohibitions against possessing and cultivating marihuana were struck down (with the declaration of invalidity suspended for a period of twelve months) after they were found to contravene s. 7 of the Charter in the case of persons who required marihuana for medically approved uses.

Recently, in Bais Yaakov of Spring Valley v Federal Communications Commission and the United States of America, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a fantastic decision striking - down illegally promulgated regulations from the Federal Communications Commission.

I was particularly struck by the Appeals Chamber assertion (para. 43 of the decision) that a rule of customary international law now exists to the effect that international courts and tribunals possess an inherent jurisdiction, which confers on each of them the power to determine the scope of their own jurisdiction (competence de la competence; Kompetenz - Kompetenz).

Doorey's Workplace Law Blog Charter Right to Strike Off to the Supreme Court It's not very surprising that the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed today to hear an appeal from a Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision finding that Section 2 (d) of the Charter [Freedom of Association] does not protect a right to sStrike Off to the Supreme Court It's not very surprising that the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed today to hear an appeal from a Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision finding that Section 2 (d) of the Charter [Freedom of Association] does not protect a right to sappeal from a Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision finding that Section 2 (d) of the Charter [Freedom of Association] does not protect a right to sAppeal decision finding that Section 2 (d) of the Charter [Freedom of Association] does not protect a right to strikestrike.

The majority overturned the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision and held that the The Public Service Essential Services Act, which prevented public sector essential workers from striking, was unconstitutional.

Hussain v Hussain is striking because the Court of Appeal is generally reluctant to overturn a decision which is essentially factual.

The Court of Appeal is not necessarily precluded from hearing appeals by the secretary of state for work and pensions on jurisdictional points against a decision of a social security commissioner, notwithstanding the fact that he was the successful appellant before the commissioner; a social security commissioner does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a legally qualified panel member who has refused to extend time or who has struck out a proposed appeal for want of jurisdiAppeal is not necessarily precluded from hearing appeals by the secretary of state for work and pensions on jurisdictional points against a decision of a social security commissioner, notwithstanding the fact that he was the successful appellant before the commissioner; a social security commissioner does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a legally qualified panel member who has refused to extend time or who has struck out a proposed appeal for want of jurisdiappeal from a legally qualified panel member who has refused to extend time or who has struck out a proposed appeal for want of jurisdiappeal for want of jurisdiction.