Sentences with phrase «claim exclusive jurisdiction»

Not exact matches

Any claims arising from this Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Denmark and shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Danish Courts.

Disputes arising in connection with these terms and conditions shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts where the claim is brought by you.

The federal and state courts of the State of New York shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all claims Miscellaneous Termination.

The federal and state courts of the State of New York shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all claims

This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with English law and the parties hereby agree that the courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with this Agreement.

You expressly agree that exclusive jurisdiction for any claim or dispute with MomsTeam or relating in any way to your use of the Services resides in the courts of Massachusetts and you further agree and expressly consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the courts of Massachusetts in connection with any such dispute including any claim involving MomsTeam or its parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, employees, contractors, officers, directors, telecommunication providers and content providers.

These terms, their subject matter and formation and any non-contractual disputes or claims are governed by the laws of England and Wales, and the courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction in relation to them.

The Courts of Ghana will have exclusive jurisdiction over any claims arising from or related to, a visit to our Website although we retain the right to bring proceedings against breach of these conditions in your country of residence or any other relevant country.

The relevant courts of Hong Kong SAR will have exclusive jurisdiction in the event of any dispute or claim associated with these TOS.

Any dispute or claim concerning or arising from this site shall be determined in accordance with the law of England and Wales, and the courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction in determining such disputes or claims.

With respect to any disputes or claims not subject to arbitration (as set forth below), you agree to exclusive jurisdiction in the state and federal courts in Los Angeles, California.

In the event of a claim by you against Tubi, you agree to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in the San Francisco County of the State of California.

By using this Site and / or providing us with your personal information, you waive any claims that may arise under the laws of other countries or territories located outside of the United States or states other than Indiana, and you agree to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of Indiana and the federal courts of Indiana.

However, in the event that any action is ever brought related to claims against CR Publishing LLC, the parties agree that exclusive jurisdiction of such claims shall be with The Chester County Court of Common Pleas in Chester County Pennsylvania.

Without limiting your right to file arbitration claims against Capital One Investing under FINRA Rule 12200 or its affiliates or successors, you consent to the personal jurisdiction and venue of the federal and state courts in King County, Washington for any court action or proceeding relating to your Account and you agree that all such claims by you against us or our affiliates or successors will be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the federal and state courts in King County, State of Washington.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, by your access to the Sites, you agree that: (i) any claim, dispute or cause of action regarding the Sites or these Terms shall be brought individually (NOT AS PART OF A CLASS ACTION) in the federal or state courts of the State of New York, and, such claim / dispute / cause of action will be resolved by a judge and THE RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL IS HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVED; (ii) you consent to the personal jurisdiction of such courts as the exclusive tribunal for adjudication of any such claim / dispute / cause of action, expressly waiving any right of forum non convenience, change of venue or like right; (iii) your recovery will be limited to actual out - of - pocket costs involved in specifically accessing the Sites (if any) and you expressly waive your right to all other forms of recovery, including by way of example only, punitive, consequential, indirect, incidental, special and exemplary damages as well as attorneys» fees for bringing such claim / dispute / cause of action; and (iv) the court shall apply the law of the State of New York in adjudicating any such claim / dispute / cause of action, except for the choice of law / conflict of law rules of the State of New York (or of any other jurisdiction which would result in the application of the law of any jurisdiction other than the State of New York).

You expressly agree that exclusive jurisdiction for any dispute with VetLIVE.com, or in any way relating to your use of the VetLIVE.com Site, resides in the courts of the State of Pennsylvania and you further agree and expressly consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the courts of the State of Pennsylvania in connection with any such dispute including any claim involving VetLIVE.com, LLC or its affiliates, subsidiaries, employees, contractors, officers, directors, telecommunication providers, and content providers.

a) These Terms of Use (and any dispute, controversy, proceedings or claim of whatever nature arising out of or in any way relating to them or their formation) and our Privacy Policy shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with English law and, for these purposes, the parties irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of English courts.

Any interpretation of its content, claims or disputes (of whatever nature and not limited to contractual issues) shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English Courts under English law.

In an extremely rare move, the Quebec Superior Court's chief justice, senior associate chief justice and associate chief justice launched the lawsuit last week, challenging whether the provincial court has exclusive jurisdiction the hear civil claims for more than $ 10,000.

Exclusive federal jurisdiction extends to state - law claims featuring «embedded» patent law issues.

Recently, the Federal Circuit has signaled that nowithstanding the post-Gunn trend, exclusive federal jurisdiction may continue over many state - law claims with embedded patent issues.

It also accords with other decisions of the British Columbia and Ontario Courts of Appeal which have determined that a strata or condominium corporation does not have exclusive jurisdiction to pursue claims involving common elements.

If a forum state's courts have «general jurisdiction» over a defendant, this means that the defendant can be sued in that forum on any cause of action against that defendant arising anywhere in the world, regardless of any other relationship that the claim has to the forum state (except for claims in the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts which can be brought in a U.S. District Court located in the same state, or in an arbitration forum pursuant to a valid arbitration clause that binds the parties, an issue beyond the scope of this question and answer).

The English courts will have exclusive jurisdiction over any claim arising from, or related to, a visit to our Site or any aspect relating to use of your data under the Privacy and Cookies Policy although we retain the right to bring proceedings against you for breach of these conditions in your country of residence or any other relevant country.

If the settling defendant is based in a different jurisdiction than the plaintiff, the defendant should also consider including a choice of venue / jurisdiction provision and a waiver of personal service on the counterparty with respect to any complaint arising from breach of the settlement agreement (e.g., if a company based in San Francisco is sued in a Small Claims Court in New York and the San Francisco company agrees to settle the claim, it should consider including a provision in the agreement that the courts in San Francisco shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any disputes arising from the breach of the settlement agreement, and the counterparty submits to the personal jurisdiction of such courts).

Although the province's Limitations Act sets a two - year deadline for court proceedings, a Superior Court judge struck the claim after finding it fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Landlord and Tenant Board, which has a one - year limitation period set by Ontario's Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).

The unanimous three - judge panel of the province's top court wrote that the motion judge got it wrong when he ruled the board had exclusive jurisdiction over the claim.

The first law provided Mexico's tax court with the exclusive jurisdiction over claims relating to public contracts (which the dispute in the arbitration arose under) and moreover, retroactively changed the statute of limitations to make a claim under public contracts from 10 years to 45 days.

10.1 The English courts will have exclusive jurisdiction over any claim arising from, or related to, a visit to the Website.

By the Judicial Authority Law, as it is known, (Law No 12 of 2004), the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts was created and Article 5 set out the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance (CFI) to hear and determine (inter alia) civil or commercial claims which fall within subparagraphs A (1)(a)- (e).

(a) has jurisdiction in any action for the payment of money where the amount claimed does not exceed the prescribed amount exclusive of interest and costs; and

Brott v United States 858 F3d 425 (6th Cir 2017)(Amici Curiae National Federation of Independent Business, Cato Institute and Southeastern Legal Foundation)(rejecting claim that property owners were entitled to jury trial in an Article III court because Congress permitted to bestow exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over takings claims seeking more than $ 10,000 in the Court of Federal Cclaims seeking more than $ 10,000 in the Court of Federal ClaimsClaims)

The ex-husband moved to dismiss the small claims action, claiming that the ex-wife's claims were within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and Family Court.

Conversely, in Ryanair Ltd v Esso Italiana Srl [2015] 1 All ER (Comm), the Court of Appeal held that the absence of any viable form of contractual complaint about an allegedly cartelised price rendered it impossible to claim that a competition law complaint about the same price was within an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

In some cases, a single court has exclusive jurisdiction over certain types of claims.

The court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of civil actions for the foreclosure of mortgages, and of real and mixed actions, except those of which the land court or district courts have jurisdiction, of complaints for flowing lands, and of claims against the commonwealth.

Accordingly, the Board has exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter and, therefore, the action must be commenced within the one - year limitation period before the Superior Court can assume jurisdiction for claims exceeding $ 25,000.

Indeed, as we explain, the state courts also have the constitutional power and duty to afford such relief to federal prisoners, but Congress has the power to withdraw such cases from the state courts by giving the federal courts exclusive jurisdiction (even implicitly) over such claims.

On 18 May 2015, Barclays issued a summary judgment application on the basis that there is no defence to its claim that the Milan proceedings fall within contractual provisions giving exclusive jurisdiction to the English courts.

On July 14th, the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed a privacy breach claim against a public body as being within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia.

79 DOS 99 Matter of DOS v. Pagano - disclosure of agency relationships; failure to appear at hearing; proper business practices; unauthorized practice of law; unearned commissions; vicarious liability; fraudulent practice; jurisdiction; ex parte hearing may proceed upon proof of proper service; DOS has jurisdiction after expiration of respondents» licenses as acts of misconduct occurred and the proceedings were commenced while the respondents were licensed; licensee fails to timely provide seller client with agency disclosure form prior to entering into listing agreement and fails to timely provide agency disclosure form to buyer upon first substantive contact; broker fails to make it clear for which party he is acting; broker violates 19 NYCRR 175.24 by using exclusive right to sell listing agreement without mandatory definitions of «exclusive right to sell» and «exclusive agency»; broker breaches fiduciary duties to seller clients by misleading them as to buyer's ability to financially consummate the transaction; broker breaches his fiduciary duty to seller by referring seller to the attorney who represented the buyers when he knew or should have known such attorney could not properly protect seller's interests; improper for broker to use listing agreements providing for broker to retain one half of any deposit if forfeited by buyer as such forfeiture clause could, by its terms, allow broker to retain part of the deposit when broker did not earn a commission; broker must conduct business under name as it appears on license; broker engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in preparing contracts for purchase and sale of real estate which did not contain a clause making it subject to the approval of the parties» attorneys and were not a form recommended by a joint bar / real estate board committee; broker demonstrated untrustworthiness and incompetency in using sales contract which purported to change the terms of the listing agreement to include a higher commission; broker demonstrated untrustworthiness and incompetency in using contracts of sale which were unclear, ambiguous, vague and incomplete; broker failed to amend purchase agreement to reflect amendment to increase deposit amount; broker demonstrated untrustworthiness in back - dating purchase agreements; broker demonstrated untrustworthiness in participating in scheme to have seller hold undisclosed second mortgage and to mislead first mortgagee about the purchaser's financial ability to purchase; broker demonstrated untrustworthiness by claiming unearned commission and filing affidavit of entitlement for unearned commission; DOS fails to establish by substantial evidence that respondent acted as undisclosed dual agent; corporate broker bound by the knowledge acquired by and is responsible for acts committed by its licensees within the actual or apparent scope of their authority; corporate and individual brokers» licenses revoked, no action taken on application for renewal until proof of payment of sum of $ 2,000.00 plus interests for deposits unlawfully retained