Sentences with phrase «comments follow a court»

Cameron's comments follow a court ruling that a supposed investment scheme entered into by several members of Take That was actually for tax avoidance.

His comments followed a court - mediated, $ 8 million settlement of a suit against his former employer for a share of the enormous profits generated by his breakthrough development of a blue light - emitting diode (LED) and work on blue semiconductor lasers.

Not exact matches

Following his tour, Comptroller Stringer also commented on the impediments placed before those who come to the court, including the lack of signage at the facility.

Their dismay follows comments from a high court judge yesterday making clear that Britain's «watertight» opt - out has been rendered meaningless by the European courts of justice.

Commenting following the sentencing of Mr Peter Harvey of All Saints RC School, Mansfield at Nottingham Crown Court this morning, Chris Keates General Secretary of the NASUWT, the largest teachers» union, said:

Chief District Court Judge Jacqueline Lee presided over the case and came up with the provision that Heng perform community service at an animal shelter as part of his punishment — an idea that many who have followed the case see as a major mistake, judging from comments left on the Justice for Cam Facebook page.

Your comment to EPA regarding obligations to follow their own «procedural requirements» for data verification is especially pertinent because courts will frequently remand cases back to an agency for procedural errors such as this.

The rules on new power plants will soon face a 60 - day public comment period, likely to be followed by intensive industry and environmental lobbying and possible court challenges.

It's an excellent and important follow - up to his earlier comments on mangled media accounts of cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Court largely dismissed the application and in doing so Mr. Justice Groves provided the following useful comments about the attendance requirement for Trial Management Conferences:

In reaching this conclusion the Court made the following comments on credibility, low velocity impacts and soft tissue injury claims:

Batner, a partner at McCarthy Tétrault LLP, made the comment following Superior Court Justice Todd Archibald's July 3 ruling awarding IMAX $ 6 million in damages for conversion and misuse of confidential information and trade secrets against Tsui as well as several companies associated with him, including Sunway Digital Inc..

One plea here to the Superior Court judiciary (and I don't mean to single out or put pressure on Mr. Justice Granger — I am merely taking advantage of his post to «comment» on the following request):

In doing so the Court provided the following comments regarding unilaterally set examinations for discovery:

In rejecting the Plaintiff's submission the Court made the following comment «It is not the court's function to ensure that a plaintiff makes a net recovery from an action when it has ignored a reasonable oCourt made the following comment «It is not the court's function to ensure that a plaintiff makes a net recovery from an action when it has ignored a reasonable ocourt's function to ensure that a plaintiff makes a net recovery from an action when it has ignored a reasonable offer.

Today, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ordered the adoption of Comment 8 to Rule 1.1, which will now read as follows in Mass.: To -LSB-...]

This article provides more details on the following comment that I posted (April 10th) to Dan Pinnington's article of April 8th, «Ontario Judge Strongly Pushes for Greater Use of Technology in Courts and Orders E-Trial»:

In Mc Fadden v Sony Music the Court followed the Opinion of AG Szpunar (see for comment on this blog here) to a large extent while disagreeing on two crucial points.

Following our previous Slaw post, where we commented on the June 15 British Columbia Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Criminal Code ban on physician - assisted suicide.

As such, my goal with this post — with the help of any SLAW readers adding additional information or clarifications in the Comments section below — is to update and consolidate postings from the CALL - L Archives and past SLAW posts to create a fairly definitive answer to the following question: Where can I find English translations of Canadian court decisions written in French?

The BC Court of Appeal modestly increased the award for care and in doing so provided the following comments on the evidence required to justify such a claim:

Following the publication last week of the Chilcott report which advocated the use of intercept evidence in court, the CBA says that although broadly supportive of the scheme, «the practical way in which this may be effected requires extensive further work and until such details are known it is difficult to comment conclusively» but that «there seems to us to be no reason in principle why such material, with the potential to be highly probative, should be the subject of a blanket bar on its use».

The willingness of the Court of Appeal further to moderate the clean hands maxim and tolerate criminal conduct is perhaps the more surprising following obiter comments of Lord Walker in the Supreme Court decision of Pitt v Holt [2013] UKSC 26, [2013] 3 All ER 429.

Today, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ordered the adoption of Comment 8 to Rule 1.1, which will now read as follows in Mass.:

In finding this was an appropriate use of the Court's discretion Mr. Justice Schultes provided the following comments:

The Court provided the following valuable comments:

However, the lower courts have not, to date, appear to have followed this particular obiter comment of the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Court did not accept the level of loss that the Plaintiff testified to and in doing so the Court provided the following comments highlighting the difficulty in assessing losses based on undeclared income:

An award of $ 12,000.00 was made, with the Court making the following comments about what must be shown with respect to a claim for future care:

Ultimately the Court rejected many of the Plaintiff's advanced damages and in doing so provided the following comments addressing Facebook photos which were put into evidence:

In November of last year, the Federal Court was faced with a statement of claim from a group of inmates and made the following comments before ordering them to seek legal counsel (at paragraph 7):

► In R v Harry Kopyto, an unhappy Toronto lawyer commented on his client's case (Mr. Dowson) as follows, to a local newspaper but still managed to escape the wrath of the court's contempt powers (thanks to a split appeal court):

In addition to the cases noted in Part I of my annual paper, the following very recent decision by the Supreme Court of Canada also deserves comment.

However, with the exception of a handful of articles immediately following the Court of Appeal's judgment there has been no further comment despite the fact that almost all residential leasehold flats will suffer a drop in value.

Comment This case is of general interest as it illustrates the court's new attitude to procedural failures following Soneji [2005] UKHL 49, [2006] 1 AC 340 in which it was held that the emphasis ought to be on the consequences of non-compliance and on the question whether or not Parliament could fairly have been taken to have intended total invalidity.

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.

The comments follow the launch of a Conservative web site, youbethejudge.ca, suggesting Baird Ellan was soft on crime while on the B.C. Provincial Court bench.

In assessing damages at $ 80,000 the Court provided the following useful comments:

Last night, Jennifer Hansler wrote this ABC News story, headlined «Trump Supreme Court Adviser Praises Judge Neil Gorsuch as Potential Heir to Scalia's Legacy,» featuring the following comments by Federalist Society leader Leonard Leo:

While the case did not relate, actually, to enforcement of a judgment — but rather related to the issue of the compellability of a witness to give evidence against his own interests in a contempt hearing — the Court, in obiter, did make the following comment:

As a point of interest, the recent BC Court of Appeal case of Innes v. Bui is worth reviewing for the Court's comments on appropriate parties to sue when the only dispute following a collision is ICBC's determination of fault and the premium consequences that flow from this.

Professor Li Shuguang of the China University of Political Science & Law, one of the preeminent Chinese bankruptcy law scholars, who attended the conference, had informed comments, citing the following challenges for the bankruptcy courts:

As such, the Court concluded that the appellant's comments were closer to legal information than to legal advice that did not follow a request for consultation.

The significance of this comment is that a court will be wary of giving effect to an agreement following a Notice to Show Cause because doing so will mean the court will lack the information necessary to properly consider the s 25 factors, a point empahsised in Smith v Smith [2000] 3 FCR 374.

The Ontario Court of Appeal in Flesch commented on the appropriateness of a summary disposition of a dispute as follows:

Regarding your follow - up comments: I doubt a court would find that an NDA (or non-compete, or some sort of combined agreement) that seeks to prevent you from doing business the company isn't even yet doing would cause problems, unless you had knowledge of their intentions to get into that business and are exploiting your knowledge of their plans for profit.

[39] Later in its reasons, when considering the desirability of recognizing the tort of intrusion upon seclusion, the Court made a number of comments that are relevant to the issues in this case, including the following:

In the course of the decision, the Court made the following important comments.

The court held that the content of the notice was so limited because the content of the right conferred by the «opportunity to comment» was itself limited in the following ways:

The court based this conclusion on the following facts: (1) other brokers attempted to impose punitive commission splits (as opposed to normal 50 - 50); (2) other brokers made disparaging comments regarding Action (i.e. that it was not reputable, did not do a good job selling its listings, etc.); (3) other brokers stated that they would show Action homes only as a «last resort» or would «avoid them like the plague»; and (4) one broker stated that Action would not survive for long because other brokers were going to drive Park out of business.