Sentences with phrase «bound by the high court»

She also was bound by the high court's 1992 decision in Mitchell v. Los Angeles Unified School District, which «rejected the notion that the only funds from nonunion members that a union constitutionally could use for political or ideological causes were those funds that the nonunion members affirmatively consented to pay.»

Selway J also finds that this determination is bound by the High Court's decision in Croker Island to hold that native title rights to exclude those exercising public rights to fish or navigate in the sea or the inter-tidal zone can not be recognised.11 Rejecting the applicants» argument that a native title right to exclude people permanently from small areas or to exclude temporarily from areas in the sea according to Yolngu traditional laws and customs is not inconsistent with the public right to fish and navigate.12 Parties are invited to make submissions on the proposed determination.

Not exact matches

I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by other departments of the government.

Last year, High Court Judge Mr Justice Ouseley said he was bound by that ruling and dismissed the case, although he asked for the Supreme Court to consider the question.

They are only bound by judgments of higher courts.

Schrems then referred the case to the Irish High Court which decided to request a preliminary ruling on the question of whether national DPAs are absolutely bound by Commission's Decisions.

Lower courts are bound by the rulings of higher courts as the interpret the law.

Stare decisis is Latin for «to stand by a decision» and legally translates into the doctrine that says courts are bound by previous decisions, or precedents, particularly when a case has been decided by a higher court.

From the Latin, «to stand by things decided», the concept of a legal system in which lower courts are bound by the determination of higher courts concerning questions of law leaves little room for the lower courts of a single jurisdiction to influence appreciation of the law across the country.

Unfortunately, in those cases, we have a number of explanations, none of which are palatable, assuming of course the problem isn't an — I'll be polite — overly technical, not demanded by legislation or any other binding on the court principle — decision from higher up the pecking order court:

In this class of cases, we think the rule of action which should govern the civil courts, founded in a broad and sound view of the relations of church and state under our system of laws, and supported by a preponderating weight of judicial authority, is that whenever the questions of discipline or of faith or ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law have been decided by the highest of these church judicatories to which the matter has been carried, the legal tribunals must accept such decisions as final and as binding on them in their application to the case before them.

The preliminary reference procedure is an excellent tool in this respect, because the highest courts are less bound by the facts of the particular case and are asked to provide a general legal framework, which can and has to be applied by lower courts.

The Singapore High Court held that as this issue was considered by the Tribunal, the Tribunal's finding of fact that there was no illegality was binding on the parties and could not be reopened by a supervisory cCourt held that as this issue was considered by the Tribunal, the Tribunal's finding of fact that there was no illegality was binding on the parties and could not be reopened by a supervisory courtcourt.

Further, where a claim is brought before the High Court (or the CAT) in respect of an infringement decision (from the CMA, the CAT on an appeal from a decision of the CMA or the European Commission), the court (or the CAT) is bound by that infringement decision once it has become fCourt (or the CAT) in respect of an infringement decision (from the CMA, the CAT on an appeal from a decision of the CMA or the European Commission), the court (or the CAT) is bound by that infringement decision once it has become fcourt (or the CAT) is bound by that infringement decision once it has become final.

In addition, the Competition Act 1998 (as amended) provides that findings of fact made by the CMA during the course of an investigation (which have not been appealed, or which have been confirmed on appeal) which are relevant to an issue arising in certain competition law proceedings before the High Court (or the CAT) are binding on the parties to those proceedings, unless the court (or the CAT) orders otherCourt (or the CAT) are binding on the parties to those proceedings, unless the court (or the CAT) orders othercourt (or the CAT) orders otherwise.

The decision of the court is binding unless it is appealed and then overturned by a higher court.

UK courts will, however, remain bound by decisions of higher UK courts, even those which resulted from CJEU guidance (absent a contrary view given upon appeal to the Supreme Court in the UK).

The High Court has ruled that the words «on any grounds whatsoever... including without limitation» in an insurance certificate between underwriters and a bank concerning funding of conditional fee agreements (CFAs) mean what they said: they include any refusal by the underwriters to accept that they are bound to pay in accordance with the certificate's terms when a claim has failed to succeed.

If the answer to question 2 positive: 3 Prevents European Union law by the national court, the highest court of the state in the area of administrative justice, against whose decisions are not permissible remedies, was in accordance ¡ svnitrostátním law bound in law brought by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, where it appears that such assessments are Acting in accordance with Union law, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Ucourt, the highest court of the state in the area of administrative justice, against whose decisions are not permissible remedies, was in accordance ¡ svnitrostátním law bound in law brought by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, where it appears that such assessments are Acting in accordance with Union law, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Ucourt of the state in the area of administrative justice, against whose decisions are not permissible remedies, was in accordance ¡ svnitrostátním law bound in law brought by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, where it appears that such assessments are Acting in accordance with Union law, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European UCourt of the Czech Republic, where it appears that such assessments are Acting in accordance with Union law, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European UCourt of Justice of the European Union?

Whether they are taken up by higher courts (the Full Federal Court or the High Court) and become binding is yet to be seen.

It not only ignores the primary role that the High Court has bestowed on the legislation for the recognition and extinguishment of native title, it also misunderstands the ethical obligations of a Government bound by international obligations of equality and non-discrimination.