Sentences with phrase «committing fraudulent acts»

Judgment in not committing fraudulent acts.

Not exact matches

While members are still liable for fraudulent and illegal acts they commit, they're not liable for LLC debts or for decisions made by company representatives.

Ms. Berney also presented numerous other examples of petiton fraud and irregularities committed by persons acting on Milano's behalf, and affidavits of Milano's fraudulent statements to voters regarding his residence and party affiliation.

One of the counts reads: «That you Dr. Raymond Dokpesi and Daar Investment and Holding Company Limited between October 2014 and March 19, 2015 in Abuja, conducted procurement fraud by means of fraudulent and corrupt act, to wit: receipt of payment into the account of Daar Investment and Holding Company Limited with First Bank of Nigeria Plc of public funds in the sum of N2, 120,000,000 from the account of the office of National Security Adviser (NSA) with the Central Bank of Nigeria for the funding of media activities for the 2015 presidential election campaign for the People's Democratic Party (PDP) and you thereby committed an offence contrary to section 58 (4)(b) of the Public Procurement Act, 2007 and punishable under Section 58 (6) & (7) of the same Act&raquact, to wit: receipt of payment into the account of Daar Investment and Holding Company Limited with First Bank of Nigeria Plc of public funds in the sum of N2, 120,000,000 from the account of the office of National Security Adviser (NSA) with the Central Bank of Nigeria for the funding of media activities for the 2015 presidential election campaign for the People's Democratic Party (PDP) and you thereby committed an offence contrary to section 58 (4)(b) of the Public Procurement Act, 2007 and punishable under Section 58 (6) & (7) of the same Act&raquAct, 2007 and punishable under Section 58 (6) & (7) of the same Act&raquAct».

«That you Mohammed Ahmed Katun while serving as an Assistant Director, Pension Department of the Office of Head of Service of the Federation on or about the 14th day of August, 2009 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, obtained by false pretences and with intent to defraud various sums of money amounting in the aggregate to N24, 660,675.00 (Twenty Four Million, Six Hundred and Sixty Thousand, Six Hundred and Seventy Five Naira only) from the Federal Government of Nigeria through the Pension Account held by the Office of the Head of Service of the Federation of Nigeria through fraudulent payments described as collective allowances into your bank account maintained with Ecobank Nigeria Limited (former Oceanic International Bank Plc) and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1 (1)(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 and punishable under Section 1 (3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006.»

With respect to the fraud contention, the Court wrote: «Defendant argues that under Exclusion F (the Fraudulent Acts Exclusion), Plaintiffs are barred from coverage because the Allstate suit alleges that Plaintiffs «committed intentional, willful, dishonest and fraudulent acFraudulent Acts Exclusion), Plaintiffs are barred from coverage because the Allstate suit alleges that Plaintiffs «committed intentional, willful, dishonest and fraudulent acfraudulent acts.»

The clause also contained language that stated contact damages were limited to direct damages only, excluding losses caused in any way by acts, omissions or misrepresentations (but excluding «any fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation» committed in connection with the agreement).

A person's intent to defraud and the fraudulent act they commit are two of the most important legal elements the government focuses on when attempting to convict accused individuals.

According to the Criminal Code, Fraud is committed when a person «by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service.»

R. v. Arsenault, 2014 CACM 8 (35946) Several charges were laid against the Applicant, including one count under s. 130 of the National Defence Act («NDA») of committing fraud contrary to s. 380 (1) of the Criminal Code, two counts under s. 117 (f) of the NDA of committing acts of a fraudulent nature not particularly specified in ss.

We do not cover: 1) loss or expense recoverable under any other insurance or through an employer; 2) loss or expense arising from or attributable to: (a) dishonest or criminal acts committed or attempted by You; (b) alleged violation of the laws of the country You are visiting, unless We determine such allegations to be fraudulent, or c) failure to maintain required documents or visas; 3) loss or expense arising from or attributable to: (a) debt, insolvency, business or commercial failure; (b) the repossession of any property; or © Your non - compliance with a contract, license or permit; 4) loss or expense arising from or due to liability assumed by You under any contract.

arising from or attributable to an actual fraudulent, dishonest or criminal act committed or attempted by the Covered Person, acting alone or in collusion with other persons.

We do not cover: 1) loss or expense recoverable under any other insurance or through an employer; 2) loss or expense arising from or attributable to: a) dishonest or criminal acts committed or attempted by You; b) alleged violation of the laws of the country You are visiting, unless We determine such allegations to be fraudulent, or c) failure to maintain required documents or visas; 3) loss or expense arising from or attributable to: a) debt, insolvency, business or commercial failure; b) the repossession of any property; or c) Your non - compliance with a contract, license or permit; 4) loss or expense arising from or due to liability assumed by You under any contract.

2) loss or expense arising from or attributable to: a) dishonest or criminal acts committed or attempted by You; b) alleged violation of the laws of the country You are visiting, unless We determine such allegations to be fraudulent, or c) failure to maintain required documents or visas;

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