Sentences with phrase «brought to court within»

In general, California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 allows cases for injuries to a person (including death) to be brought to court within two years of the date of the injury.

Not exact matches

The four men who brought lawsuits this week in DeKalb County, Georgia, State Court claim that Long took them on overnight trips to various locations within the United States and outside of the country, sharing a room and engaging in sexual contact with them, including massaging, masturbation or oral sex.

Although the specific issue of restricting smoking in prisons may appear of minor significance compared to other recent defeats in court for the justice secretary, this judgment is important because it clearly brings the prison system within the ambit of the Health Act.

«I have made an order which has to be obeyed and the order is to the effect that the accused be allowed to go abroad as from November 4 to treat his ailment within three weeks and return to the court on November 26 for his trial in the charges brought against him», the judge had said.

Some executives within the Ningo Prampram Constituency have threatened to go to court if the Party's National Executive Committee fails to investigate and address a petition brought before it.

The charges in part read: «That you Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki whilst being National Security Adviser and Shaibu Salisu, whilst being the Director of Finance and Administration in the Office of the National Security Adviser and Hon. Waripamowei Dudafa (now at large) whilst bring Senior Special Assistant, Domestic Affairs to the President on or about 27th November within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court entrusted with dominion over certain properties to wit: the sum of N10billion being part of the funds in the account of the National Security Adviser with the CBN, the equivalent of which sum you received from the CBN in foreign currencies to wit: $ 47million and $ 5.6 million Euros committed criminal breach of trust in respect of the said property when you claimed to have distributed same to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential Primary Election delegates and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 315 of the Penal Code Act, Cap 532, Vol.4, LFN 2004.

I have no idea where the CJ would get the authority not just to reach down and expedite a pending appeal but to order that cases in varying states of disarray (and maybe some have not even been filed yet) resolved at the trial level and the first appellate level and brought up to the Court of Appeals, IF the top court even has jurisdiction over each distinct dispute, within a fixed Court of Appeals, IF the top court even has jurisdiction over each distinct dispute, within a fixed court even has jurisdiction over each distinct dispute, within a fixed time.

«I shall in the coming week write to each and every agency of government concerned and demand that the regulations be brought to Parliament within 30 days otherwise I will proceed to the Supreme Court to seek an injunction against all that they are doing in violation of the law.»

«I shall in the coming week write to each and every agency of government concerned and demand that the regulations be brought to Parliament within 30 days otherwise I will proceed to the Supreme Court to seek an injunction against all that they are doing in violation of the law,» he said to Citi News at the time.

Our lawmakers have known for many years that laws protecting animals ultimately require a slow process within the Courts to bring about protecting our pets, especially when the pets» safety may require immediate action.

Agents immediately seized the animals and brought them back to the Humane Society for assessment.The owner was insistent that he wanted his dogs back however, our investigations team was determined that that was not going to happen and did everything within their power to ensure the dogs were kept safe and were well cared for until after taking the owner to court.

Under the reformed process that I propose, challenges to refineries and other energy project permits must be brought before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals within 60 days of the issuance of a permit decision.

The particular issue is when an agency action is a rule - making decision, so stays within the agency, or an individual judicial action and so can be brought to the courts.

So the Court has to somewhat state the obvious, holding that of course its reasoning applies to «all judicial proceedings brought within the territorial entity concerned, including civil proceedings» (para 20).

While these documents dealt with matters that related generally to EU - Turkey relations, in the Court's view they did not in and of themselves possess the link relevant to bring them within the exception (paras 38 - 59).

For a plaintiff who recovers a sum within the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court to recover more than disbursements, the court must make a finding that there was sufficient reason for bringing the action in the Supreme CCourt to recover more than disbursements, the court must make a finding that there was sufficient reason for bringing the action in the Supreme Ccourt must make a finding that there was sufficient reason for bringing the action in the Supreme CourtCourt.

Notwithstanding a delay of over four years in bringing a drug case of modest complexity to trial, both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal were of the view that the appellant was tried within a reasonable time.

A plaintiff who recovers a sum within the jurisdiction of the Provincial Court under the Small Claims Act is not entitled to costs, other than disbursements, unless the court finds that there is sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orCourt under the Small Claims Act is not entitled to costs, other than disbursements, unless the court finds that there is sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orcourt finds that there is sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orCourt and so orders.

If you or someone you know has not been released following arrest, you have the right to be brought to Court for a bail hearing within 24 hours or as soon as possible.

Lastly, the Court found that — as in Annibaldi — the fact that national legislation could have an indirect effect on a system established by EU law could not constitute a sufficient connection to bring such legislation within the scope of EU law (para 29).

Even though article 101 TFEU does not apply to the facts of the case, the fact that Hungarian competition law was aligned with EU competition law (see para. 21) brings the question within the Court's jurisdiction.

The CJEU concluded that the sanction for a breach of the EU Courts» obligation to adjudicate cases within a reasonable time must be an action for damages brought before the General Court since such an action constitutes an effective remedy (para 94).

Actions relating to records within the Canadian Intellectual Property Office, such as disputes over ownership or inventorship of a patent or trade - mark must be brought in the Federal Court — s. 20 (1)(a).

Given that the shuttering dispute concerned the «secondary right» to bring a claim before the SADC Tribunal, rather than the investments in the mining leases themselves, the High Court struggled to conceptualize how this could fit within the restrictive terminology used in the SADC Treaty.

The Supreme Court has allowed the appeal of Krista Bates van Winkelhof, a former member of the law firm Clyde & Co LLP («the LLP»), holding that Ms Winkelhof is a worker within the meaning of section 230 (3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 («the 1996 Act»), and thus entitled to bring a whistle blowing -LSB-...]

Defending metal producer Timminco Ltd. against fraud allegations before the Ontario Court of Appeal last year, he helped set an important precedent barring plaintiffs from bringing secondary - market class action suits if they failed to get leave to appeal within three years.

In Tannadyce, the Supreme Court in the majority judgment of Blanchard, Tipping and Gault JJ (delivered by Tipping J) confined judicial review to cases where the taxpayer was unable to bring its grievance within the statutory process.

Within this same context, we note that another action before this Court was brought in June of this year, in which it is alleged that Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data by removing the data protection supervisor from office before time.

If the employee is not obligated to comply with pre-suit administrative procedures, the state court action must be brought within 180 days of the alleged adverse action.

If the employee is obligated to comply with pre-suit administrative procedures, as will be discussed below, a state court action must be brought within 180 days of an administrative decision.

The James Elliott Construction case brings before the Court of Justice (ECJ), for the first time, the issue of whether it is within the Court's jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings on harmonised technical standards (HSs).

«[45] Given that s 24 and s 24A MCA 1973 is a barred route to relief at an interim stage, I am unable to conclude that an application brought under a generic procedural rule (rule 20 FPR 2010) can deliver a result which is specifically prohibited within the claim before the court.

Proposed plans include: · Introducing a power to dispense with the formalities for a will, to allow courts to recognise wills where the deceased's testamentary intentions are clear; · Enabling electronic wills provided that there is sufficient protection for testators against fraud and undue influence; · The creation of a separate doctrine of testamentary undue influence; · Bringing the test for testamentary capacity within the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to take into account modern understanding of conditions like dementia; and · Reducing the age at which a will can be made to 16.

Claimants who had suffered sexual abuse but need to seek the discretion of the court under s 33 were driven to alleging that the abuse was the result of, or accompanied by, some other breach of duty which could be brought within the language of s 11.

A contested bail hearing usually takes place on the day the accused is first brought to court or at least within several days of the arrest.

``... we wish to take this opportunity to make it clear that if a party brings such a motion to this court within three weeks of the hearing of the appeal, the judge hearing the motion in chambers must be told of the date on which the appeal is to be heard.

If you fail to bring action within the court system by the deadline, you will probably be prohibited from filing a lawsuit and recovering compensation.

Rule 57 (10) states that «A plaintiff who recovers a sum within the jurisdiction of the Provincial Court under the Small Claims Act is not entitled to costs, other than disbursements, unless the court finds that there was sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orders.&rCourt under the Small Claims Act is not entitled to costs, other than disbursements, unless the court finds that there was sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orders.&rcourt finds that there was sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orders.&rCourt and so orders.»

Ultimately, the courts have made it clear that, if the claimant can not demonstrate a good excuse for the failure to bring the claim within the three - year period, the defender's rights will take priority (Fleming v Keiler).

In this weeks judgement the court agreed that despite the fact that the Plaintiff was awarded $ 12,290 in damages (an award well within the small claims court jurisdiction), the Plaintiff did have sufficient reason to bring the proceedings in Supreme Ccourt agreed that despite the fact that the Plaintiff was awarded $ 12,290 in damages (an award well within the small claims court jurisdiction), the Plaintiff did have sufficient reason to bring the proceedings in Supreme Ccourt jurisdiction), the Plaintiff did have sufficient reason to bring the proceedings in Supreme CourtCourt.

While even criminal cases may not see time inside a courtroom due to things like pleas, for the cases that are brought to trial most cases are tried within the Provincial Courts in Canada.

The court presumes that a parent who brings an action to modify a parenting plan within 6 months after the other parent has sued for child support, or a parent who seeks to make changes in a final parenting plan without making a real effort to comply with the plan or with the dispute resolution provisions of the plan, is acting vexatiously.

The court explained that the nursing home's «fraudulent concealment» acted to toll the statute of limitations, but the family still did not bring the suit within a reasonable amount of time.

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Japan, in the Hague Abduction Convention case between James Cook and Hitomi Arimitsu — which upheld the Osaka High Court's revocation of its prior order that four children wrongfully retained in Japan should be returned to their habitual residence in the United States — vividly highlights the loopholes and fundamental weaknesses in the Implementing Act under which the Convention was brought into Japanese law and the resistance within Japan to acceptance of the principles underlying the Convention.

Family law judges within the Ontario Court of Justice were originally brought into the merged Court in 1990, at a time when it appeared that many of them might shortly be appointed to an expanded UFC.

This could lead to far more actions being brought as the awards are invariably modest, and frequently within the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court.

(a) In Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v Avant Garde Maritime Services (Private) Limited [2018] SGHC 78 («Rakna Arakshaka»), the Singapore High Court held that where a tribunal had ruled on its own jurisdiction as a preliminary question, the party wishing to challenge the tribunal's jurisdiction had to bring that issue to the supervisory court within 30 days of receipt of notice of the tribunal's ruling, pursuant to Article 16 (3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law («Model Law «-RRB-, read with section 10 (3) of the International Arbitration Act («IAA «-Court held that where a tribunal had ruled on its own jurisdiction as a preliminary question, the party wishing to challenge the tribunal's jurisdiction had to bring that issue to the supervisory court within 30 days of receipt of notice of the tribunal's ruling, pursuant to Article 16 (3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law («Model Law «-RRB-, read with section 10 (3) of the International Arbitration Act («IAA «-court within 30 days of receipt of notice of the tribunal's ruling, pursuant to Article 16 (3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law («Model Law «-RRB-, read with section 10 (3) of the International Arbitration Act («IAA «-RRB-.

See R. v. Campbell, [1964] 20 O.R. 487 (C.A.) where the Ontario Court of Appeal held: «[t] o me it is inconceivable that Parliament in enacting the Combines Investigation Act [the predecessor anti-combines statute in Canada to the Competition Act] should have intended to make a person, sometimes conveniently referred to as the «principal», guilty of an offence thereby created and not bring within the scope of that offence a person who aids and abets that «principal», and, without whose aid and assistance, conceivably, the offence could not be committed.

The right to appear brings with it the responsibility to respect the process of the court and to act within its rules.

The paltry award is well within the $ 25,000 jurisdiction of the small claims court and placed the plaintiff at risk of being denied his costs for the action, despite his victory, because he had brought the action to the wrong court.