Sentences with phrase «decisions on matters concerning»

the parents» willingness to accept custody and ability to cooperate with the other parent in making decisions on matters concerning the child;

Not exact matches

It is difficult to take proper account of the myriad relevant factors in making decisions on even relatively minor matters like diet, let alone such major concerns as foreign policy or population control.

Rather than having Woodward try to make the best of it, the club need a qualified professional to help the manager, independent of financial and commercial concerns and decisions, who is focussed entirely on footballing matters.

The elders also called on the Federal Government to observe restraint while making pronouncements on the matter and consult widely with relevant stakeholders when major decisions concerning the amnesty programme are to be taken.

In a matter of 15 days, those Legislators believed that Erie County had enough information to make a significant decision concerning hydraulic fracturing on county property.

He said the government was feeling the «pressure» of citizens against its decision on the agreement and so wanted to redirect their concerns to less sensitive matters such as the renaming of the seat of government.

«As a county legislator, I believe it is critical to be kept abreast on the New Stadium Working Group's discussions in order for the Legislature to make informed decisions when voting on a matter concerning public dollars and county resources.

«It is a matter of great concern that spending decisions keep on asking the poorest families to make more sacrifices when growth targets are missed, rather than those with broader shoulders.

At 1.5 / 2 °C temperature warming level, how the global and regional climate will change, is a matter of public concern and relates to the decisions of policies, guidelines and measures on mitigation and adaption of future climate change.

On the matter of testing, 68 % in Louisiana reported that «concerns about required testing» played a role in their decision not to participate compared to 29 % in Florida.

«When information is on a matter of public concern, the court held, the fact that it was illegally leaked doesn't make publishing it an invasion of privacy,» writes Mr. Volokh, summing up the decision.

The Ontario Court of Appeal's recent decision in Strudwick v. Applied Consumer & Clinical Evaluations Inc. («Strudwick») provides a useful clarification to all litigants, but especially those concerned with employment law matters, on the nature of various heads of damages and the general rule that «You don't get what you don't ask for.»

a) that ruling is inconsistent with a judgment or a decision of a competent authority on that matter given in the State under the law of which the intellectual property right arose; or b) proceedings concerning the validity of the intellectual property right are pending in that State.

Having access to up to date local knowledge concerning which Government lawyers will be taking on the case, profiling the appetite of the particular prosecution team to try and resolve the matter through a negotiated plea / settlement / DPA and making the key forensic decisions very early on about your client's potential value to the Prosecution are some additional challenges that arise in cross border investigations.

Whilst the Court of Justice alone has jurisdiction to declare an EU act invalid, where a claim is lodged with the national supervisory authorities they may, even where the Commission has adopted a decision finding that a third country affords an adequate level of protection of personal data, examine whether the transfer of a person's data to the third country complies with the requirements of the EU legislation on the protection of that data and, in the same way as the person concerned, bring the matter before the national courts, in order that the national courts make a reference for a preliminary ruling for the purpose of examination of that decision's validity

(4) A relevant decision may not be taken except on imperative grounds of public security in respect of an EEA national who: (a) has resided in the UK for a continuous period of at least 10 years before the relevant decision; or... (5) Where a relevant decision is taken on grounds of public policy or public security it shall, in addition to complying with the preceding paragraphs of this regulation, be taken in accordance with the following principles --(a) the decision must comply with the principle of proportionality; (b) the decision must be based exclusively on the personal conduct of the person concerned; (c) the personal conduct of the person concerned must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society; (d) matters isolated from the particulars of the case or which relate to considerations of general prevention do not justify the decision; and (e) a person's previous criminal convictions do not in themselves justify the decision.

The appeal court said in its decision that the personal concerns of public embarrassment are not enough by themselves to justify non-publication or sealing orders and said assessing emotional distress versus emotional harm is a matter of degree to be measured against the media's right to report on court proceedings.