Sentences with phrase «damaging approach it has taken»

We support this action and sincerely hope that it will persuade the government to reconsider the deeply misguided and damaging approach it has taken to date.

Not exact matches

As it addresses the varied and deeply harmful problems of immigration detention, the government needs to deliver a more risk - averse approach: not waiting until vulnerable people have been damaged and re-traumatised, but taking pre-emptive action to ensure that people who've experienced such horrific abuse are not subjected to further harm.

«There are those who contest that the UK has historically set far too much store by home - ownership and that we should be unconcerned that the average age of the first - time buyer is approaching forty but taken together, this trend, the spread of means - tested benefits, the regime for long term care, the damage done to private pension provision by one of Gordon Brown's earliest misjudgements, compounded by the current squeeze on household finances which has seen over a million people forced to abandon contributions to their pension funds, all amount to a massive turn away from a culture of property ownership with the responsibility and independence that goes with it.»

Frankovich hoped the approach would work, but Paul Michael's brain was potentially damaged, she warned, and it could take years to repair.

Our system provides policymakers with time to take corrective action that would help avert, or at least mitigate, the damage associated with an approaching crisis.»

- split up into three waves - each wave gives the team a quota of eggs to collect, as well as a time limit - goal is to defeat enemies, causing them to drop eggs - haul those eggs back to the basket - if you meet your quota (and you're still alive) when time expires, all remaining enemies retreat and you move on - when you start out, the difficulty can be set to 5 % out of a possible 100 % - heavy Salmonids have armor in the front, so you have to him them in the back - when Inklings take too much damage in Salmon Run, they can be revived by a teammate shooting them with ink - another boss character is a tall, slender creature that approaches from the shoreline - this boss is made up off pots, which you have to shoot to make disappear - another boss is a massive metal eel that rains down ink - the eel is piloted by a Salmonid creature, which you have to take out to stop the eel - another boss has two trashcans attached to the side of it, and it hovers over the battlefield, - a trashcan opens and it rains down blobs of ink onto you - you can take him out by tossing bombs into the open trashcans - Nintendo says that 40 % difficulty is the highest difficulty people on the Nintendo E3 team could beat.

We have a moral obligation to leave our children a planet that's not polluted or damaged, and by taking an all - of - the - above approach to develop homegrown energy and steady, responsible steps to cut carbon pollution, we can protect our kids» health and begin to slow the effects of climate change so we leave a cleaner, more stable environment for future generations.

It's almost un-American to criticize capitalism and globalization (suck it Tom Frank) or to suggest that maybe there is a better way, but when a system leads to the possible destruction of a planet, even die hards have to stop and take pause, although I doubt they'd touch Klein's book, which is both unapologetic in its tone and approach and optimistic about slowing down the damage we've done.

Takes a principled approach and settles claims where there has been negligence and the client suffered damages;

«Reining in Remedies in Patent Litigation: Three (Increasingly Immodest) Proposals» proposes that injunctions be unavailable over FRAND - pledged SEPs, advocates apportionment of the disgorgement of an infringer's profits that a design patent holder can seek (this approach would have taken care of a substantial part of the damages issue in Apple v. Samsung, for example), and finally — which is the most ambitious part but makes a lot of sense to me — elaborates in the form of a «thought experiment» on an idea Judge Posner tossed out a few month ago: for a «wide swath of U.S. patent cases» it might be preferable to avoid juries.

«We looked at the damage that had been done and then took a forward looking approach and thought of the damage he will suffer in the future.

There has also been a tendency for solicitors to take a risk averse approach; parties often stick with what they know, perhaps worried that a narrower form of disclosure might enable their opponent to withhold damaging documents.

The public trust doctrine has not been widely discussed in Canadian case law with the only significant mention being by the Supreme Court of Canada in British Columbia v. Canadian Forest Products Ltd., 2004 SCC 38 at para. 74 where Binnie J. acknowledged that «The notion that there are public rights in the environment that reside in the Crown has deep roots in the common law» (however, the majority decision ultimately took a conservative approach to not allow the Crown to succeed in a general claim for damages for «environmental loss» [caused by a negligently undetected controlled burn of slashing and other waste by a logging company] in the absence of a statutory scheme permitting such a claim).

He made this decision based on the fact that the insurer had denied the benefits for six years in order to delay payment to take advantage of the insured's economic vulnerability.5 Moreover, the claims advisor for the defendant took an adversarial approach and did not deal with the claim fairly and in a balanced way.6 As such, the insurer was deemed to have acted in bad faith and the plaintiff was awarded $ 200,000 in punitive damages.

A more balanced alternative to the improper «winner takes all» approach adopted by the Federal Circuit would be to base damages on how much the infringing designs contributed to the overall value of the smartphones Samsung sold, EFF said.

The customary «day in court» approach takes an extraordinary amount of time, has a «sticker shock» cost, causes irreparable damage to families, and rarely achieved the best result for the parties.