Sentences with phrase «considered by the highest court»

The key aspects of the proposal considered by the High Court are:

The question of how serious must the conduct be to constitute harassment for the purpose of a claim under PHA 1997 has been considered by the higher courts.

The First Circuit panel also accepted Hughes Hubbard's argument that his request to have his claim considered by the highest court of Massachusetts was untimely because he chose to file his case in federal court and go to trial without requesting that the state court consider his novel legal theory.

And while the Crown must appeal this decision, it sets the stage for the statute to be considered by a higher court where it may be subject to a more sophisticated level of judicial interpretation.

Table No 2 indicates the inadequacy of the protection of native title provided by the validation provisions of the NTA, by reference to specific tenures considered by the High Court in the Miriuwung Gajerrong and Wilson v Anderson decisions.

Not exact matches

Allegations that late High Court judge Lionel Murphy had been involved in a tax avoidance scheme in Western Australia are contained in classified documents considered by a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry released in Canberra today.

By Richard Allen Greene, CNN London (CNN)- Christian activists in Britain are furious at the arguments their government will use against them when Europe's highest court considers whether employees have the right to wear crosses that show over their uniforms.

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.

The decision from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals was sparked by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the case of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, whose conviction was overturned by the nation's highest court in a ruling that narrowed the definition of the types of official acts that could be considered as part of quid pro quo arrangemCourt of Appeals was sparked by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the case of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, whose conviction was overturned by the nation's highest court in a ruling that narrowed the definition of the types of official acts that could be considered as part of quid pro quo arrangemCourt's decision in the case of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, whose conviction was overturned by the nation's highest court in a ruling that narrowed the definition of the types of official acts that could be considered as part of quid pro quo arrangemcourt in a ruling that narrowed the definition of the types of official acts that could be considered as part of quid pro quo arrangements.

«In this application, if one carefully considers the reliefs sought by the first interested party at the high court, it becomes abundantly clear that the court was never called upon to interpret article 94 (1)(a) of the constitution.

The ruling released on Monday in a 5 - 3 decision is being considered by advocates on both sides of the abortion debate as one of the most consequential in a generation from the high court.

``... considering the order above quoted and the depositions, I do not understand or comprehend why the applicant / respondent's counsel, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo, would still argue and stand his ground that the same account has not be unfrozen by the Federal High Court sitting in Ekiti State.

The stake's on Donegal's books at 23.8 M, and last valued by the court at 26.2 M — considering more recent deals, I'd hope / expect Donegal can successfully argue for a significantly higher valuation multiple, but obviously that will also depend on the evolution of MMM's EBITDA... They should also argue against what seemed like debatable adjustments to MMM's EV previously.

However, before considering CO2 as a «criteria pollutant» subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act, the Supreme Court ruling requires the EPA to demonstrate by independent research that higher levels of CO2 are damaging to «human health and welfare.»

However, in the case named above the Court of Schleswig - Holstein justifies its decision by saying that the level of violence applied by the person subject to the EAW was not strong enough to be considered as «High Treason», referring to German jurisdiction.

Ian Gallacher considered this question in his study of readability scores of briefs filed in New York's highest court from 1969 to 2008.244 Gallacher's study «was designed to reveal if the effects of systematic legal - writing instruction in law schools could be seen in documents written by lawyers.»

At the end of the process it was suggested that permission to commit assisted suicide ought to be authorised by a High Court judge who would have to consider whether the criteria had been met.

This express point was considered by Mr Andrew Edis QC sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge in the QBD in Saulle v Nouvet [2007] EWHC 2902.

The English High Court in Bank and Clients Plc v King and Brown considered guarantor liability in circumstances where the guarantors, Messrs King and Brown, alleged representations had been made by the Bank that would relieve them of their liability.

In Soil Instruments Ltd v Mr Robert King Mason, His Honour Judge Bird, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court, considered whether Mr King Mason should be committed to prison for alleged breaches of an Order made by Mrs Justice May on 26th July 2017, concerning the use of confidential information under a restrictive covenant.

Thus, after rejecting the alleged infringement of art. 67 LRJCA by the judgment under appeal, the High Court to understand that it gave a succinct but substantial enough to arguments made in response instance, if it considers, however, an infringement of Art. 6.1 b) of Law 17/2001, of Trademarks, and the applicable case law.

In Shane Anthony Cooley (By His Father and Litigation Friend Peter Anthony Cooley) v Ramsey [2008] EWHC 129 (QB), the High Court was asked to consider whether it had jurisdiction to grant permission for proceedings to be served in Australia in a case where a British citizen had been left grossly handicapped as a result of a road traffic accident which had occurred in Australia; and whether, if so, it should exercise its discretion in the claimant's favour.

The Court of Appeal decided that a reference to the CJEU was necessary as, although the decision of the Bundesgerichtshof was persuasive (as it is the highest civil court in Germany), the meaning of «the Member State where the act of infringement has been committed» in Art. 97 (5) / 125 (5) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation had not been decided by the CJEU, and it considered that the decision not to allocate jurisdiction in circumstances where there was activity in Country A which led to infringement of the EU trade mark in Country B, would give rise to there being no jurisdiction at all for such infringeCourt of Appeal decided that a reference to the CJEU was necessary as, although the decision of the Bundesgerichtshof was persuasive (as it is the highest civil court in Germany), the meaning of «the Member State where the act of infringement has been committed» in Art. 97 (5) / 125 (5) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation had not been decided by the CJEU, and it considered that the decision not to allocate jurisdiction in circumstances where there was activity in Country A which led to infringement of the EU trade mark in Country B, would give rise to there being no jurisdiction at all for such infringecourt in Germany), the meaning of «the Member State where the act of infringement has been committed» in Art. 97 (5) / 125 (5) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation had not been decided by the CJEU, and it considered that the decision not to allocate jurisdiction in circumstances where there was activity in Country A which led to infringement of the EU trade mark in Country B, would give rise to there being no jurisdiction at all for such infringement.

The Court of Appeal then went on to consider whether it was proportionate to grant the injunction sought by Cartier, bearing in mind the requirements identified by the High Court that the relief must be necessary, effective, dissuasive, not unnecessarily complicated or costly, avoid barriers to legitimate trade, be fair and equitable and strike a fair balance between the applicable fundamental rights, and be proportionate.

This month, we also look at the High Court's comments about a clause requiring an employee to tell his employer about job offers from competitors - the first time that such clauses have been considered in any detail by the courts.

These wishes will be considered by the court but will not be given higher priority than what the court sees as the best interest of the child.

In his work with Chancery Capital Bill considers the suitability for funding of large commercial cases proceeding in the High Court or by Arbitration and US and Australian cases.

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.

In Indigo v Colchester Institute, David Donaldson QC sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge in the QBD, considered an application by the Defendant under Regulation 47H (1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (as amended by the Public Contracts (Amendment) Regulations 2009) to lift the automatic suspension imposed by Regulation 47G.

In this issue: Brexit: A Disputes Perspective; Court of Appeal considers non-party funding in two recent cases; Arbitration and enforcement bolstered by Australian High Court decision: freezing order can be granted in expectation of a foreign judgment or arbitration award; Conferences and events

If the child is made a party, the court must also consider whether the case is being dealt with by the correct level of judge in the Family Court or High Ccourt must also consider whether the case is being dealt with by the correct level of judge in the Family Court or High CCourt or High CourtCourt.

In Accentuate Ltd v ASIGRA Inc. [2009] EWHC 2655, however, the High Court suggested that an arbitration agreement will be considered «null, void and inoperative» if it purports to require the submission of disputes governed by mandatory EU law to an arbitral tribunal seated in a non-EU state applying non-EU law.

R. v. Jarvis: Former Lerners» partner Gillian Hnatiw represents the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) in this Supreme Court of Canada case, which considers a decision by a majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal that upheld the acquittal of a high school teacher who had used a camera pen to surreptitiously take videos of female students and of one female teacher, while he was conversing with them in school, and which focused on their chests and cleavage area.

However, in Tonicstar Limited v Allianz Insurance and Sirius International Insurance Corporation, the High Court considered whether the arbitrator possessed «the qualifications required by the arbitration agreement» under Section 24 (b) of the Arbitration Act 1996 in an insurance dispute arising out of the 9/11 attack in New York.

This is an important judgment because it is the first time across the EU that the application of the Modified Greenfield approach to regulation has been considered in detail by a higher court.

In another case arising from tobacco litigation, Philip Morris USA v. Williams, No. 07 - 1216, the Court will consider whether a punitive damages award that is nearly 100 times higher than the compensatory damages award may be justified by the reprehensibility of a defendant's conduct, despite the constitutional requirement that punitive damages be reasonably related to the plaintiff's harm.

The court considered that even if the applicants» Art 8 complaint was before the secretary of state and the Court of Appeal, the policy set the threshold so high against them from the outset that it did not allow a balancing of the competing individual and public interests and a proportionality test by the secretary of state or by the domestic courts in their case, as required by the Convencourt considered that even if the applicants» Art 8 complaint was before the secretary of state and the Court of Appeal, the policy set the threshold so high against them from the outset that it did not allow a balancing of the competing individual and public interests and a proportionality test by the secretary of state or by the domestic courts in their case, as required by the ConvenCourt of Appeal, the policy set the threshold so high against them from the outset that it did not allow a balancing of the competing individual and public interests and a proportionality test by the secretary of state or by the domestic courts in their case, as required by the Convention.

These wishes will be considered by the court but will not be given higher priority than what the court sees as the best interest of the child.

The High Court considered that the alternative rights with which the Western Australian parliament intended to replace native title «fell short of the rights and entitlements conferred by native title and enjoyment of which is protected by... the Racial Discrimination Act» Western Australia - v - Commonwealth (1995) 128 ALR 1 at 34.

The report is correct in saying that Wik established that native title is not necessarily extinguished by pastoral leases - the High Court reasoned that it was necessary to consider the type of lease in question (some leases granted exclusive possession and were inconsistent with the continued recognition of native title, whereas other leases did not have this effect).

(50) It falls for the High Court to consider whether the particular outcomes of the principles applied by the majority in the Full Court «weigh in favour of a somewhat less draconian limitation on the ability of the common law to recognise and protect native title rights and interests».

The extent of recognition and protection, as confirmed by the High Court in Western Australia v Ward [13], is restricted by the ability for native title applicants to prove a continued system of traditional law and custom, and in considering extinguishment, an examination of the intention of any conflicting legislation or any inconsistency in the nature of legal interests conferred by statute.

While the majority decision of the High Court maintained the analogy of «intersection» in considering the claim of the Yorta Yorta people, [68] it was clear by the time of this decision that the law was not simply a recognition space and many claims would remain outside the protection of native title law.

Interestingly, in their identification of discrimination, the High Court did not consider the differential impact of the Mining Act whereby native title rights were permanently extinguished by mining while the rights of occupiers or owners were only impaired temporarily by mining.

[97] It falls for the High Court to consider whether the particular outcomes of the principles applied by the majority in the Full Court «weigh in favour of a somewhat less draconian limitation on the ability of the common law to recognise and protect native title rights and interests».

In Walker v NSW (19), the High Court had to consider whether customary Aboriginal criminal law is something which has been recognized by the common law and which continues to this day, in the same way that Mabo decided that customary law relating to land tenure continues to exist.

Massachusetts's highest court has considered whether a trial court had properly invalidated two foreclosure sales conducted by two large banks.

Delaware's highest court has considered whether a listing broker could receive payment when a lease transaction occurred, rather than the sale contemplated by the listing agreement.

In response to a certified question propounded by a federal court, Montana's highest court considers whether the state's license laws allow a buyer's representative to represent clients who are bidding against each other for the same property.

Iowa's highest court has considered whether a home inspector hired by a relocation company who was in the process of selling a home can be liable to the purchaser of the home for negligently performing its inspection of the property.