Sentences with phrase «court at a reasonable cost»

I know not if a claim arises but if it does, how do the individuals secure access to the court at a reasonable cost?

Not exact matches

At least the court revised the insurer's proposed terms to circumscribe the obligation in these terms: «The defence insurer shall be entitled to require the claimant to undergo medical examination at its request upon reasonable notice being given to the claimant at any time during the claimant's lifetime, such medical examinations to be limited to obtaining a medical opinion as to the claimant's general health in order to obtain a quotation for the purchase cost of an annuity to fund the periodical payments and / or (not more frequently than once every seven years) for the express purposes of reviewing its reservAt least the court revised the insurer's proposed terms to circumscribe the obligation in these terms: «The defence insurer shall be entitled to require the claimant to undergo medical examination at its request upon reasonable notice being given to the claimant at any time during the claimant's lifetime, such medical examinations to be limited to obtaining a medical opinion as to the claimant's general health in order to obtain a quotation for the purchase cost of an annuity to fund the periodical payments and / or (not more frequently than once every seven years) for the express purposes of reviewing its reservat its request upon reasonable notice being given to the claimant at any time during the claimant's lifetime, such medical examinations to be limited to obtaining a medical opinion as to the claimant's general health in order to obtain a quotation for the purchase cost of an annuity to fund the periodical payments and / or (not more frequently than once every seven years) for the express purposes of reviewing its reservat any time during the claimant's lifetime, such medical examinations to be limited to obtaining a medical opinion as to the claimant's general health in order to obtain a quotation for the purchase cost of an annuity to fund the periodical payments and / or (not more frequently than once every seven years) for the express purposes of reviewing its reserve.

Meanwhile, these four types of damage caused by the problem are getting worse: (1) to the population in that there are many thousands of people whose lives have been damaged for lack of legal services; (2) to the courts in that they are being clogged, as judges have warned, by high percentages of self - represented litigants, because their cases move much more slowly than those that have lawyers; (3) to the legal profession in that it is shrinking and is predicted to have a very negative future of contracting and of law firms failing; and, (4) to legal aid organizations because it is politically very unwise for governments to fund them better with taxpayers» money, to enable them to provide free legal services to more poor people, while the majority of the taxpayers can not obtain legal services for themselves at reasonable cost.

Although the Supreme Court of Canada held in Christie that a «general access to legal services in relation to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the populaCourt of Canada held in Christie that a «general access to legal services in relation to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the populacourt and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the population.

In a civil action involving a represented litigant where money, not liberty, was at issue, the court's award of costs in Voisey would have been entirely reasonable.

The plaintiff is entitled to her costs of the action at Scale B and necessary and reasonable disbursements to the date of delivery of this offer assessed in accordance with Rule 14 - 1 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, B.C. Reg.168 / 09 (the «Civil Rules»); and

Cost awards should reflect what the Court deems to be a fair and reasonable amount that should be paid by the unsuccessful party (Boucher v. Public Accountants Council for the Province of Ontario (2004), 71 O.R. (3d) 291 at para 24).

The second solution will come about after courts first declare that legal services are in fact not available to the majority of the population at reasonable cost.

Both solutions will occur because the power of the news media and of the internet, interacting, will quickly make widely known these types of information, the cumulative effect of which will force governments and the courts to act: (1) the situations of the thousands of people whose lives have been ruined because they could not obtain the help of a lawyer; (2) the statistics as to the increasing percentages of litigants who are unrepresented and clogging the courts, causing judges to provide more public warnings; (3) the large fees that some lawyers charge; (4) increasing numbers of people being denied Legal Aid and court - appointed lawyers; (5) the many years that law societies have been unsuccessful in coping with this problem which continues to grow worse; (6) people prosecuted for «the unauthorized practice of law» because they tried to help others desperately in need of a lawyer whom they couldn't afford to hire; (7) that there is no truly effective advertising creating competition among law firms that could cause them to lower their fees; (8) that law societies are too comfortably protected by their monopoly over the provision of legal services, which is why they might block the expansion of the paralegal profession, and haven't effectively innovated with electronic technology and new infrastructure so as to be able to solve this problem; (9) that when members of the public access the law society website they don't see any reference to the problem that can assure them that something effective is being done and, (10) in order for the rule of law, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the whole of Canada's constitution be able to operate effectively and command sufficient respect, the majority of the population must be able to obtain a lawyer at reasonable cost.

Given the length of the proceeding, the serious nature of the allegations, the complexity of the issues, the length of the trial, and Champlain's unqualified success at trial, the Court concluded that a fair and reasonable award of partial indemnity costs of the action to Champlain is $ 1,675,000.00, and reduced the costs accordingly.

(iv) If health care coverage is not available to either party at a reasonable cost, the court may order the custodial parent to apply for government - sponsored coverage, such as the Children's Health Insurance Program («CHIP»), with any co-premium or other cost apportioned between the parties in proportion to their respective net monthly incomes.

If health care coverage is not available at a reasonable cost, the court may order the parent with primary physical responsibility for the child to apply for public health care coverage.

Yes, in Maryland, the Court can order either parent to include a child on their health insurance policy if the child can be included at a reasonable cost to the parent.