Sentences with phrase «course on a trial basis»

Not exact matches

Although not directly comparable, our findings are in broad agreement with those from routine data in Scotland that have indicated a positive association between Baby Friendly accreditation, but not certification, and breastfeeding at 1 week of age.17 Our findings reinforce those of Coutinho and colleagues who reported that high exclusive breastfeeding rates achieved in Brazilian hospitals implementing staff training with the course content of the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative were short - lived and not sustained at home unless implemented in combination with post-natal home visits.35 Similarly in Italy, training of staff with an adapted version of the Baby Friendly course content resulted in high breastfeeding rates at discharge, with a rapid decrease in the days after leaving hospital.36 In contrast, a cluster randomized trial in Belarus (PROBIT) found an association between an intervention modelled on the Baby Friendly Initiative with an increased duration of breastfeeding37 an association also reported from an observational study in Germany.38 Mothers in Belarus stay in hospital post-partum for 6 — 7 days, and in Germany for 5 days, with post-natal support likely to be particularly important in countries where mothers stay in the hospital for a shorter time, with early discharge likely to limit the influence of a hospital - based intervention.

«The outcome of this GCM must therefore be based on careful appreciation of the whole facts of each case and evidence placed before you in the course of trial of these accused persons.

The trial is based on the quality of your dog's performance of specific behaviors and your speed as a team in completing the course — if two dogs finish with the same score, but different times.

Trials Fusion returns players to the physics based gameplay of extreme bike riding on increasingly punishing courses while adding a new FMX trick mode.

(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or to an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual; [the law enforcement exemption]

There are, of course, earlier cases where an appeal was allowed on the basis that the decision of the trial judge was not truly a judicial decision.

Even a very incomplete list gives an impression of the large number of significant opinions he has written: seminal administrative law cases such as Chevron v. NRDC and Massachusetts v. EPA, the intellectual property case Sony Corp v. Universal City Studios (which made clear that making individual videotapes of television programs did not constitute copyright infringement), important war on terror precedents such as Rasul v. Bush and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, important criminal law cases such as Padilla v. Kentucky (holding that defense counsel must inform the defendant if a guilty plea carries a risk of deportation) and Atkins v. Virginia (which reversed precedent to hold it was unconstitutional to impose capital punishment on the mentally retarded), and of course Apprendi v. New Jersey (which revolutionized criminal sentencing by holding that the Sixth Amendment right to jury trial prohibited judges from enhancing criminal sentences beyond statutory maximums based on facts other than those decided by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt).

If it is also seen as a means of strengthening cases it will no doubt be on the perceived basis that having a pep talk with the CPS lawyer and the trial advocate will put the complainant at her ease, somehow encourage her to stay the course and improve her performance in the witness box.

Of course, it would still be up to a jury to decide, but based on Apple's proposed and supported interpretation of the law, the judge presiding over a cupholder design patent trial wouldn't have a choice but to instruct the jury that a total, unapportioned disgorgement of profits is possible under the law.