Sentences with phrase «disclosed by order of the court»

A Bell customer can reasonably contemplate, therefore, that his or her identity may be disclosed by order of the court in the event he or she engages in unlawful, abusive or tortious activity.

For example, the agreements with eBay Canada expressly provide that they may disclose confidential «eBay System Information» (which the appellants say includes information about PowerSellers) which «is required to be disclosed by order of any court»: Appeal Book, vol.

Not exact matches

To the extent permitted by law, we may also disclose Personal Information, the Billing Information, and the Other Information when required by law, court order, or other government or law enforcement authority or regulatory agency, or whenever we believe that disclosing such Information is necessary or advisable, for example, to protect the rights, property, or safety of Daily Harvest or others

We reserve the right to use or disclose your Personal Information if required by law or if we reasonably believe that use or disclosure is necessary to protect our rights, protect your safety or the safety of others, investigate fraud, or comply with a law, court order, or legal process.

To the extent permitted by law, we will disclose your information to government authorities or third parties if: (a) required to do so by law, or in response to a subpoena or court order; (b) we believe in our sole discretion that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable laws.

Both of these third party services will not disclose personal information unless ordered by a court of law.

In his writ filed on Friday, Mr Amidu, popularly known as Citizen Vigilante, said: «I oppose the application for stay of proceeding on the main ground that it discloses no reasonable ground or grounds for the making of an application for stay of proceedings to this Court pending the discharge or reversal of the ruling order of this Court dated 16th November 2016 aforesaid to warrant its consideration by this Court.»

SMH.COM.AU - July 22 - Jetplace, the operator of dating website Red Hot Pie, has been ordered by the federal court to disclose to its users that it operated 1,371 of its own profiles on the website.

Term Life Insurance By Jeff reserves the right to fully cooperate with any law enforcement authorities or court order requesting or directing Term Life Insurance By Jeff to disclose the identity of anyone posting any e-mail messages, or publishing or otherwise making available any materials that are believed to violate these Terms and Conditions of Use.

We will disclose Personal Information when we believe in good faith that such disclosures (a) are required by law, including, for example, to comply with a court order or subpoena, or (b) will help to: enforce our policies; enforce contest, sweepstakes, promotions, and / or game rules; protect your safety or security, including the safety and security of property that belongs to you; and / or, protect the safety and security of our Site or third parties.

We may disclose your personal information with or without your knowledge or consent when we are permitted or required to do so by applicable law, government request or court order, or based on our good faith belief that it is necessary to do so in order to comply with such law, request or court order; to enforce or apply applicable terms and conditions and other agreements; or to protect the rights, property or safety of our organization, our supporters, other users, pets in the care of organizations that we work with, the public or others.

Disclosure of Personal Information The Pace Gallery may disclose your personal information to unaffiliated third parties if we believe in good faith that such disclosure is necessary (a) to comply with the law or in response to a subpoena, court order, government request, or other legal process; (b) to protect the interests, rights, safety, or property of The Pace Gallery or others; (c) to enforce any terms of service on the Web Site; (d) to provide you with the service requested by you (including allowing a purchaser of a Pace Gallery division, or Pace Gallery as a whole, to continue to serve you), and to perform other activities related to such services; or (e) to operate The Pace Gallery's systems properly.

willfully, and otherwise than in obedience to an order of the Central Government or of a State Government, or of an officer specially authorized [by the Central or a State Government] to make the order, omits to transmit, or intercepts or detains, any message or any part thereof, or otherwise than in pursuance of his official duty or in obedience to the direction of a competent Court, discloses the contents or any part the contents of any message, to any person not entitled to receive the same, or

Farkhad Akhmedov, 61, has shown «naked determination», one judge said, to keep his immense # 453 million fortune out of the reach of his former wife, Tatiana, but the Court of Appeal judges on Tuesday agreed that his solicitor was rightly ordered to disclose that the businessman's # 90 million art collection was held by «entities in Liechtenstein».

[16] Thus, the issue is framed — can a defendant or third party who has not obtained a doctor's report by compulsion of a court order, and prior to disclosure of any medical - legal reports by the plaintiff or in the absence of any reports, obtain access to the non-treating doctor's notes and clinical findings, or are said notes and clinical records privileged as forming part of the brief of the plaintiff's solicitor until the time when the plaintiff chooses to rely on the non-treating doctor as a witness at trial and the doctor's notes must be disclosed...

It's fair to say Google won't take down the site and will not disclose info unless they're ordered to do so by court of law.

You hereby grant Box and its contractors the right to transmit, use and disclose Content posted on the Service solely to the extent necessary to provide the Service, as otherwise permitted by these Terms, or to comply with any request of a governmental or regulatory body (including subpoenas or court orders), as otherwise required by law, or to respond to an emergency which Box believes in good faith requires Box to disclose information to assist in preventing the death or serious bodily injury of any person.

Individuals shall not, directly or indirectly, disseminate, make available, disclose, or use any reason other than performance of their job with the Company, any confidential information or proprietary data of the Company, unless and only to the extent such release or disclosure is required by any court or administrative agency (and then only after prompt notice to the Company to permit the Company to seek a protective order).

This applies both where that advice is limited in time, eg until after a criminal defence statement has been filed and served and, worse still, the advice is given not to make such a response at all; • (f) the date on which a party to care proceedings is to file and serve a criminal defence statement in linked criminal proceedings is wholly irrelevant to the court's determination of the date on which that party should file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement in the care proceedings; • (g) the mere fact that a party is ordered to file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement before the date a criminal defence statement is to be filed and served in criminal proceedings is not a ground for failing to comply with the former order; • (h) it [is not] a ground for an application to extend the time for compliance with an order to file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement until a date after the criminal defence statement has been filed and served; and • (i) any issue about alleged prejudice to a defendant in criminal proceedings based on him being required to file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement before the date of a criminal defence statement is to be filed and served, or at all, only arises and is only potentially relevant if and when an application is made by the police and / or a co-accused for statements and documents filed in the family proceedings to be disclosed into linked criminal proceedings [see Re C (A Minor)(Care Proceedings: Disclosure)[1997] Fam 76, [1997] 2 WLR 322, sub nom Re EC (Disclosure of Material)[1996] 2 FLR 725, CA].

Section 7 of PIPEDA permits the company to disclose personal information that is required to comply with a subpoena or warrant issued by a court, or to comply with a court order.

That distinction is recognized in Ontario in Rule 30.02 (4): (4) The court may order a party to disclose all relevant documents in the possession, control or power of the party's subsidiary or affiliated corporation or of a corporation controlled directly or indirectly by the party and to produce for inspection all such documents that are not privileged.

(a) lawful authority refers to lawful authority other than (i) a subpoena or warrant issued, or an order made, by a court, person or body with jurisdiction to compel the production of information, or (ii) rules of court relating to the production of records; and (b) the organization that discloses the personal information is not required to verify the validity of the lawful authority identified by the government institution or the part of a government institution.

Reasons for judgement were released recently by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, ordering a Defendant to disclose the cost of their medico - legal reports where they were contesting the reasonableness of the Plaintiff's disbursements.

The question is: do the documents in dispute, ie, MSP and Pharmanet, come withing the terms of either Rule 7 - 1 (1)(a), ie, documents that can be used by a party of record to prove or disprove a material fact or that will be referred to at trial or, if not, do they come under category 7 - 1 (11), generally, in the vernacular, referred to as the Guano documents... There is no question that there is a higher duty on a party requesting documents under the second category... that in addition to requesting, they must explain and satisfy either the party being demanded or the court, if an order is sought, with an explanation «with reasonable specificity that indicates the reason why such additional documents or classes of documents should be disclosed», and again, there is no doubt that the new Rules have limited the obligation for production in the first instance to the first category that I have described and has reduced or lessened the obligation for production in general...

In his recent decision in SA Capital Growth Corp. v. Brooks, Justice Pattillo of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) addressed the question of whether a court - appointed receiver should be required to disclose documents and information obtained by it as a result of a court - ordered investigation to one of the subjects of the investigation, where that party is facing allegations by the Ontario Securities Commission («OSC&raqCourt of Justice (Commercial List) addressed the question of whether a court - appointed receiver should be required to disclose documents and information obtained by it as a result of a court - ordered investigation to one of the subjects of the investigation, where that party is facing allegations by the Ontario Securities Commission («OSC&raqcourt - appointed receiver should be required to disclose documents and information obtained by it as a result of a court - ordered investigation to one of the subjects of the investigation, where that party is facing allegations by the Ontario Securities Commission («OSC&raqcourt - ordered investigation to one of the subjects of the investigation, where that party is facing allegations by the Ontario Securities Commission («OSC»).

Counsel should disclose, not only underlying documents, but copies of all summaries / charts sufficiently in advance in order to obtain stipulations regarding accuracy and admissibility or to allow for a pretrial examination and rulings by the court.

The case concerned an application brought by a number of school boards for a court order that the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board («WSIB») give them certain personal information about their injured workers after the WSIB refused to disclose information from individual workers» claims files to them...

The hearing comes nearly two - and - a-half years after the chief justice of the Quebec Superior Court ordered an investigation, based on information disclosed by police from a drug probe known as Operation Ecrevisse.

«Lawful authority» in s. 7 (3)(c. 1)(ii) of PIPEDA must be contrasted with s. 7 (3)(c), which provides that personal information may be disclosed without consent where «required to comply with a subpoena or warrant issued or an order made by a court, person or body with jurisdiction to compel the production of information, or to comply with rules of court relating to the production of records».

If the request for disclosure of protected health information were not accompanied by a court order, covered entities could not have disclosed the information requested unless a request authorized by law had been made by the agency requesting the information or by legal counsel representing a party to litigation, with a written statement certifying that the protected health information requested concerned a litigant to the proceeding and that the health condition of the litigant was at issue at the proceeding.

Under the NPRM, if the request for disclosure of protected health information was accompanied by a court order, a covered entity could have disclosed that protected health information which the court order authorized to be disclosed.

Response: Under the final rule, if the disclosure is pursuant to an order of a court or administrative tribunal, covered entities may disclose only the protected health information expressly authorized by the order.

Covered entities may also disclose protected health information in response to a subpoena, discovery request, or other lawful process without a court order, but only if the covered entity receives satisfactory assurances that the party seeking disclosure has made reasonable efforts to ensure that the individual has been notified of the request or that reasonable efforts have been made by the party seeking the information to secure a qualified protective order.

In the NPRM we would have allowed covered entities to disclose protected health information in the course of any judicial or administrative proceeding: (1) In response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal; or (2) where an individual was a party to the proceeding and his or her medical condition or history was at issue and the disclosure was pursuant to lawful process or otherwise authorized by law.

(i) In response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal, provided that the covered entity discloses only the protected health information expressly authorized by such order; or

Under the final rule, covered entities may disclose protected health information in compliance with and as limited by relevant requirements of: a court order or court - ordered warrant, or a subpoena or summons issued by a judicial officer.

In a circumstance where a non-lawyer violated solicitor — client privilege by accessing the plaintiff's email and reading email exchanges with her lawyer, the court required the defendant to disclose the privileged information he obtained to the plaintiff, restrained him from any use of the information, and ordered him to pay all legal costs of the plaintiff.

In § 164.512 (e) of the final rule, we permit covered entities to disclose protected health information in a judicial or administrative proceeding if the request for such protected health information is made through or pursuant to an order from a court or administrative tribunal or in response to a subpoena or discovery request from, or other lawful process by a party to the proceeding.

Additionally, a covered entity may disclose protected health information for judicial and administrative proceedings in response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal provided that the disclosure is limited to only that information that is expressly authorized by the order.

For instance, in response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal, the covered entity may disclose only the protected health information that is expressly authorized by such an order.

The statutory scheme of PACE 1984, ss 8 and 15, permits a Magistrates» Court in an ex parte application for a search and seizure warrant to have regard to material that, on public interest grounds, can not be disclosed to a person affected by the warrant or order, even where this material is decisive for the legitimacy of the warrant.

Therefore, in accordance with the terms of our privacy statement we will not disclose to any third party for any reason either the contents of or any facts relating to the contents of a user's email or any other communication a user sends to us; provided, however, such disclosure will be made when required to do so by law or by properly issued court order or when good - faith belief exists that such action is legally necessary to: (1) comply with the law or comply with legal process served on California Legal Research, Inc.; (2) protect and defend the legitimate business interests, rights or property of California Legal Research, Inc., its users, customers, or affiliates; or (3) act in an emergency to protect the personal safety of CALRI.com users or the public.

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners» Health Information Privacy Model Act states, «A carrier shall not collect, use or disclose protected health information without a valid authorization from the subject of the protected health information, except as permitted by * * * this Act or as permitted or required by law or court order.

The Defendant, by herself or by her employee, agents, or otherwise, and any other person with knowledge of the terms of this Order, be and is hereby restrained from disseminating, publishing, or otherwise disclosing any private information about the Plaintiff, his sexual practices, or anything that would connect him to having had a sexual relationship with the Defendant (the «Private Information»), until the trial or other disposition of this proceeding or until further Order of this Honourable Court...

Term Life Insurance By Jeff reserves the right to fully cooperate with any law enforcement authorities or court order requesting or directing Term Life Insurance By Jeff to disclose the identity of anyone posting any e-mail messages, or publishing or otherwise making available any materials that are believed to violate these Terms and Conditions of Use.

However, CareerBuilder Employment Screening may be required, upon receipt of a court order to release the information in civil litigation or as otherwise required by law, to disclose information regarding a consumer to law enforcement agencies.

Unless prohibited by law or by a valid court order, we will notify you of any subpoena received from any other party (i.e., for civil litigation) which requires us to disclose your identity, and will wait ten (10) days, or a lesser amount of time as required by the deadline in the subpoena, before providing the information requested by the subpoena.

(1) Information provided to the Registry Manager of a court under a location order (including a Commonwealth information order) must not be disclosed by the Registry Manager, or by any other person who obtains the information (whether directly or indirectly and whether under this section or otherwise) because of the provision of the information to the Registry Manager, except to: