Sentences with phrase «appropriate jurisdiction of courts»

From my cursory review of the coverage, Kerr appears to be right — most news reports are not focusing on the appropriate jurisdiction of courts and Congress.

Not exact matches

The Enrollment Program also authorizes a superior court to have jurisdiction over enrollees by allowing it to «appoint a receiver, monitor, conservator, or other designated fiduciary or officer of the court for a defendant or the defendant's assets,» as well as authorizes the Commissioner of Business Oversight to «include in civil actions claims for ancillary relief, including restitution and disgorgement, on behalf of a person injured, as well as attorney's fees and costs, and civil penalties of up to $ 25,000» for up to four years after the purported violation occurred and «refer evidence regarding violations of the bill's provisions to the Attorney General, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the United States Department of the Treasury, or the district attorney of the county in which the violation occurred, who would be authorized, with or without this type of a reference, to institute appropriate proceedings.»

Finally, Cook says that the FBI is proposing what Apple is calling «unprecedented use» of the All Writs Act of 1789, which authorizes federal courts to issue all orders necessary or appropriate «in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.»

If any provision of these Terms is, for any reason, invalid and / or unenforceable, as determined in an appropriate Court of proper jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.

The act states that «the Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.»

10.1 Any dispute relating in any way to your visit to a Nestlé Waters North America Inc. website or to products or services you purchase through a Nestlé Waters North America Inc. website shall be submitted to confidential arbitration in Stamford, Connecticut, except that, to the extent you have in any manner violated or threatened to violate Nestlé Waters North America Inc.'s intellectual property rights, Nestlé Waters North America Inc. may seek injunctive or other appropriate relief in any state or federal court in the state of Connecticut, and you consent to exclusive jurisdiction and venue in such courts.

To the extent you have in any manner violated or threatened to violate The Math Learning Center's intellectual property rights; disclosed or threatened to disclose any of The Math Learning Center's confidential or proprietary information; violated or threatened to violate the security of any person, data, The Math Learning Center servers or networks, and / or the Websites; and / or otherwise breached or threatened to breach these Terms, you acknowledge and agree that such actual or threatened violation or breach will cause immediate and irreparable harm to The Math Learning Center, and we shall be entitled to injunctive and other appropriate relief, including without limitation specific performance (without the posting of a bond or other security and without proving damages), and you agree that we may seek such relief in any court of competent jurisdiction.

(a) Whenever the Attorney General receives a complaint in writing signed by an individual to the effect that he is being deprived of or threatened with the loss of his right to the equal protection of the laws, on account of his race, color, religion, or national origin, by being denied equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof, other than a public school or public college as defined in section 401 of title IV hereof, 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 progress of desegregation in public facilities, the Attorney General is authorized 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.

(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 proposed Final Judgment provides that the Court retains jurisdiction over this action, and the parties may apply to the Court for any order necessary or appropriate for modification, interpretation, or enforcement of the Final Judgment.

This Court retains jurisdiction to enable any party to apply to this Court at any time for further orders and directions as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out or construe this Final Judgment, to modify any of its provisions, to enforce compliance, and to punish violations of its provisions.

Sole and exclusive jurisdiction for any action or proceeding arising out of or related to this Agreement, including application and / or interpretation of the arbitration provision, or CRA's services shall be an appropriate state of federal court located in Laramie County in the state of Wyoming.

In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment by the registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a trustee, officer or controlling person of the registrant in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such trustee, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, the registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in such Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment by Registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a trustee, officer or controlling person of Registrant in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such trustee, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, Registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in the 1933 Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

Complaints for damages shall be adjudicated in the court of appropriate jurisdiction, not decided by the animal control officer.

At paras [19] to [28] he explained the jurisdiction of the court to strike out a case; and explained why strike out was not appropriate here.

Guaranteeing access to courts is not enough unless said courts can guarantee the appropriate remedy will be granted: «Of what value are the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter if a person is denied or delayed access to a court of competent jurisdiction in order to vindicate them?&raquOf what value are the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter if a person is denied or delayed access to a court of competent jurisdiction in order to vindicate them?&raquof competent jurisdiction in order to vindicate them?»

The Ontario Court of Justice has no tort jurisdiction, and an application for child support before the Ontario Court of Justice is not the appropriate forum in which to attempt to establish the tort of «hostile sexual act of DNA theft».

For a particular court to be an appropriate place to file a case, two types of jurisdiction must exist: personal jurisdiction and subject - matter jurisdiction.

Club Resorts sought to block those proceedings, arguing that the Ontario courts lacked jurisdiction and, in the alternative, that a Cuban court would be a more appropriate forum on the basis of the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

With respect to issues concerning custody and guardianship of the children requiring change, from the standpoint of children ¡ ¯ s welfare, it is appropriate to authorize adjudicative jurisdiction to a court having jurisdiction over the abiding place or the habitual residence of the children.

«There is still to be a new rules committee for online court claims, the online procedure rules committee, whose purpose will be to formulate new rules specifically applicable to online dispute resolution, with an emphasis on simplicity of language appropriate for litigants - in - person and so far as possible common rules for all three jurisdictions.»

The contemplated amendments to the Act also specifically confirm that the Small Claims Court has the jurisdiction to order production of documents where appropriate.

The English court is perceived as being generous towards wives compared to many other jurisdictions, and willing to look at a wide variety of assets, including trusts, when deciding on appropriate financial provision.

In Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Ltd [2003] UKPC 26 the Privy Council clarified that the right to seek disclosure is a facet of the court's inherent jurisdiction to supervise and (if appropriate) to intervene in the administration of trusts.

In different factual settings, this court held that a judge has jurisdiction under s. 1 of the Negligence Act to apportion fault against a person who is not a party to the action, and can exercise this jurisdiction in an appropriate case.

Goldhar commenced a defamation action in Ontario against the newspaper, its former sports editor and the author of the article; Haaretz moved to stay the action, arguing that Ontario courts lack jurisdiction simpliciter or, alternatively, that Israel is a more appropriate forum for the action.

Any marked change in the approach taken by EU Member State Courts towards appropriate recognition of English jurisdiction is likely to provoke a move away from Europe altogether, towards New York, Singapore or Hong Kong.

A criminal court also has inherent jurisdiction to ensure a fair trial and, in the event of a dispute over the justification for a redaction, a judge can always review the material if he or she considers it appropriate.

Permission to serve a defendant out of the jurisdiction must be obtained from the Court, which will involve convincing the Court that the claim is a type which it has the power to decide; that the claim has a prospect of succeeding; and that England and Wales is the appropriate forum to determine the claim.

In this case, it was held that under section 3 of the Act the court has jurisdiction to give appropriate relief especially the interim orders where the seat of arbitration is outside Bangladesh.

Judgment: The decision of a court having the appropriate jurisdiction to have tried the case; the final determination of a case; a ruling of the court.

Article 226 of the Constitution of India states that notwithstanding anything in Article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs.

The DIFC Courts have jurisdiction to make costs orders against third parties, including Funders, where the Court deems it appropriate, given the circumstances of the case.

The court granted mother's motion to dismiss finding that it was appropriate for the court to decline continuing jurisdiction over this matter because mother and the children no longer had a significant connection with the State of New Hampshire.

In deciding that wrongful dismissal damages were not an appropriate matter for summary judgment, the court's reasoning expressly went beyond the question of the jurisdiction of a Master under the Court of Queen's Bench Act, but rather was based upon «the purpose and nature of summary judgment applications, trials and summary trials» (at paragraphcourt's reasoning expressly went beyond the question of the jurisdiction of a Master under the Court of Queen's Bench Act, but rather was based upon «the purpose and nature of summary judgment applications, trials and summary trials» (at paragraphCourt of Queen's Bench Act, but rather was based upon «the purpose and nature of summary judgment applications, trials and summary trials» (at paragraph 31).

The appropriate state or federal court in [COUNTY], [STATE] will be the exclusive jurisdiction and venue for any dispute arising out of this Independent Contractor Agreement.

In order to obtain permission, the claimant will have to show (in relation to each cause of action which forms part of the claim) that: (1) there is a serious issue to be tried in relation to the foreign defendant (i.e. the claim must have a real prospect of success); (2) there is a good arguable case that the claim falls within one or more of the «jurisdictional gateways» set out in the Civil Procedure Rules; and (3) England is clearly the appropriate forum for the case and the Court ought to exercise its discretion to permit service of the proceedings out of the jurisdiction.

And here, since it appears from the statement in the order of the Court of Appeal that the question whether the Syndicalism Act and its application in this case was repugnant to the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment was considered and passed upon by that court — this being a federal question constituting an appropriate ground for a review of the judgment — we conclude that this Court has acquired jurisdiction under the writ of eCourt of Appeal that the question whether the Syndicalism Act and its application in this case was repugnant to the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment was considered and passed upon by that court — this being a federal question constituting an appropriate ground for a review of the judgment — we conclude that this Court has acquired jurisdiction under the writ of ecourt — this being a federal question constituting an appropriate ground for a review of the judgment — we conclude that this Court has acquired jurisdiction under the writ of eCourt has acquired jurisdiction under the writ of error.

Dutch Equity was an appropriate case where the court could rely on Article 8 (2)(e) to take advantage of the already developed body of company law cases in various common law jurisdictions because the DIFC Companies Law is based on common law principles.

When considering if the English Court is clearly the appropriate forum for the dispute to be determined, the factors the English Court may consider are wide, and include: (i) the personal connections the parties have to the countries which are relevant to the dispute (ii) the factual focus of the dispute (i.e. in what country / countries did the relevant events occur)(iii) factors affecting convenience or expense, such as the location of witnesses and / or documents (iv) applicable law and (v) whether the matter would receive a fair trial in another jurisdiction.

Specifically, given that the Alberta Courts (unlike Ontario and British Columbia) had not provided any specific guidelines for applications like this, preliminary issues such as appropriate notice; jurisdiction; confidentiality; and sufficiency of evidence needed to be addressed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Goldhar v. Haaretz.com on the issue of whether Ontario was the appropriate jurisdiction to litigate a defamation claim relating to an online publication by an Israeli newspaper that purported to defame Mr. Goldhar, who lives in Toronto but has business connections in Israel.

The Court also recognised that there may be other connecting factors that are similar to these ones that can also create a presumption of jurisdiction — factors that are similar to those listed or otherwise recognised as appropriate connecting factors by case law, statute, or other states» legal systems.

The All Writs Act 28 USC s. 1651 is a United States statute that authorizes the federal courts to «issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.»

Once the courts of a particular province are found to have jurisdiction simpliciter, it is then available to a defendant to establish that the courts should nevertheless decline jurisdiction on the basis of forum non conveniens — on the basis that another forum is clearly more appropriate for a particular action.

(3) A judge presiding over the Family Court may, on motion, order that a proceeding commenced in the Family Court be transferred to the appropriate court in a place where the Family Court does not have jurisdiction if, in the judge's opinion, the preponderance of convenience favours having the matter dealt with by that court in that pCourt may, on motion, order that a proceeding commenced in the Family Court be transferred to the appropriate court in a place where the Family Court does not have jurisdiction if, in the judge's opinion, the preponderance of convenience favours having the matter dealt with by that court in that pCourt be transferred to the appropriate court in a place where the Family Court does not have jurisdiction if, in the judge's opinion, the preponderance of convenience favours having the matter dealt with by that court in that pcourt in a place where the Family Court does not have jurisdiction if, in the judge's opinion, the preponderance of convenience favours having the matter dealt with by that court in that pCourt does not have jurisdiction if, in the judge's opinion, the preponderance of convenience favours having the matter dealt with by that court in that pcourt in that place.

The guide amounts to a valuable information resource for both legal and business professionals, providing a high - level overview of a large number of aspects, from a general overview of the country's regulations and specificities, employment relationship, recruitment, wages and working hours, to workplace related privacy, discrimination, family leave and even termination and which tribunals / courts have the appropriate jurisdiction to hear labor - related complaints.

Court ordered amounts and payment schedules can not be altered without revisiting the support issue under the guidance of both an attorney and the court with appropriate jurisdicCourt ordered amounts and payment schedules can not be altered without revisiting the support issue under the guidance of both an attorney and the court with appropriate jurisdiccourt with appropriate jurisdiction.

(4) Despite subsection (2), a court may decline to make an order under this Part if the court, having regard to the interests of the spouses and the ends of justice, considers that it is more appropriate for jurisdiction to be exercised outside British Columbia.