Sentences with phrase «electronic evidence as»

He has hands on experience with electronic evidence as a trial lawyer too.

Not exact matches

Also, as of 2006, any type of electronic records, including e-mail, can be used as evidence in federal lawsuits.

Subject to Section 6 and the other terms and conditions of the Plan, each Stock Appreciation Right grant will be evidenced by an Award Agreement (which may be in electronic form) that will specify the exercise price, the term of the Stock Appreciation Right, the conditions of exercise, and such other terms and conditions as the Administrator, in its sole discretion, will determine.

If, in the Sponsor's opinion, there is any suspected or actual evidence of electronic or non-electronic tampering with any portion of the Promotion, or if computer virus, bugs, unauthorized intervention, fraud, or technical difficulties or failures compromise or corrupt or affect the administration, integrity, security, fairness, or proper conduct of the Promotion, the Sponsor reserves the right at their sole discretion to disqualify any individual who tampers with the entry process and void any entries submitted fraudulently, to modify or suspend the Promotion, or to terminate the Promotion and conduct a random drawing to award the prizes using all eligible, non-suspect entries received as of the termination date.

In the past three years Clegg has backed the «snoopers» charter», pushed for secret courts and stood mutely as evidence emerged of widespread electronic surveillance by the security services.

The parking committee's information technology contractor, Electronic Data Systems, a subsidiary of General Motors, scans in all the evidence as an image and stores the information in a database.

This latest experimental evidence could elevate the material's use as a test subject for next - gen applications, such as a new breed of electronic devices that manipulate its spin property to carry and store data more efficiently than present - day devices.

«At present, there is little direct evidence demonstrating that electronic alcohol screening and brief counseling intervention has a meaningful population - level effect on excessive alcohol consumption or related harms in any group, and therefore its utility as a stand - alone public health approach is in doubt.

Professor Peter McOwan from QMUL's School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, and co-author of the study, said: «This research is important, as it provides further evidence that computers can be used as aids in creative tasks.

«To describe electronic cigarette use as «a new drug use option» and part of «at - risk teenagers» substance using repertoires» is unnecessarily alarmist, given the evidence that regular use among never smokers is negligible, the lack of evidence that electronic cigarette use acts as a gateway to tobacco use, and the likely low level of harm associated with electronic cigarette use.»

Early Child Development and Care Early Childhood Education Journal Early Education and Development Early Years: An International Journal of Research and Development Education Education & Training Education 3 - 13 Education and Culture Education and Information Technologies Education and Society Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities Education and Treatment of Children Education and Urban Society Education as Change Education Economics Education Finance and Policy Education for Information Education Leadership Review Education Leadership Review of Doctoral Research Education Libraries Education Next Education Policy Analysis Archives Education Research and Perspectives Education Sciences Education, Citizenship and Social Justice Educational Action Research Educational Administration Quarterly Educational and Developmental Psychologist Educational and Psychological Measurement Educational Assessment Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Educational Considerations Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis Educational Forum Educational Foundations Educational Gerontology Educational Leadership Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching and Program Development Educational Management Administration & Leadership Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Educational Media International Educational Perspectives Educational Philosophy and Theory Educational Policy Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research Educational Practice and Theory Educational Psychologist Educational Psychology Educational Psychology in Practice Educational Psychology Review Educational Research Educational Research and Evaluation Educational Research and Reviews Educational Research for Policy and Practice Educational Research Quarterly Educational Researcher Educational Review Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice Educational Studies Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook Educational Studies in Mathematics Educational Studies: Journal of the American Educational Studies Association Educational Technology Educational Technology & Society Educational Technology Research and Development Educational Theory eJEP: eJournal of Education Policy e-Journal of Business Education and Scholarship of Teaching E-Learning and Digital Media Electronic Journal of e-Learning Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology Elementary School Journal ELT Journal Emotional & Behavioural Difficulties Engineering Design Graphics Journal English Education English in Australia English in Education English in Texas English Journal English Language Teaching English Teaching Forum Environmental Education Research Equity & Excellence in Education Ethics and Education Ethnography and Education ETS Research Report Series Eurasian Journal of Educational Research European Early Childhood Education Research Journal European Education European Educational Research Journal European Journal of Contemporary Education European Journal of Education European Journal of Educational Research European Journal of Engineering Education European Journal of Higher Education European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning European Journal of Physics Education European Journal of Psychology of Education European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education European Journal of Special Needs Education European Journal of STEM Education European Journal of Teacher Education European Journal of Training and Development European Physical Education Review Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice Exceptional Children Exceptionality Exceptionality Education International

The range of his activities is evidenced by his many collaborations including with the artists Dominique Gonzalez - Foerster, Anri Sala and Tino Sehgal, as well as the bands Einstürzende Neubauten (with whom he has made two CDʼs), The Orb and The Residents, the performance group La Fura dels Baus, the interdisciplinary architecture team Raumlabor Berlin, and the electronic music pioneer Morton Subotnik.

Joe, you mention that «Lewandowsky falsely linked climate skeptics to moon landing hoaxism, and free marketeers to rejection of beliefs they overwhelmingly endorsed» Far worse, his compatriot Prof David Karoly falsely linked skeptics to an (imaginary) «relentless campaign» of electronic death threats against Australian climate scientists, none of which Karoly deigned or was asked to produce as evidence despite the fact that he was alleging the existence of a serious (and despicable) criminal conspiracy.

Sedona Canada does not analyze: (1) the meaning and consequences of the «system integrity concept» in the e-records provisions of the Evidence Acts — proof of «records integrity» requires proof of «records system integrity»; (2) the National Standard of Canada for e-records management, Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005 («72.34»); and, (3) the need of the parties to exchange verifications of compliance, provided by records management experts, of their electronic records management systems (ERMS's) with the nationalElectronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005 («72.34»); and, (3) the need of the parties to exchange verifications of compliance, provided by records management experts, of their electronic records management systems (ERMS's) with the nationalelectronic records management systems (ERMS's) with the national standard.

Therefore it can be used to test the «integrity» that provisions such as, s. 31.2 (1)(a) of the Canada Evidence Act (CEA), and s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act (OEA), require of ERMSs, for the purpose of determining the admissibility of electronic records as evidence; e.g., R. v. Oler, 2014 AEvidence Act (CEA), and s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act (OEA), require of ERMSs, for the purpose of determining the admissibility of electronic records as evidence; e.g., R. v. Oler, 2014 AEvidence Act (OEA), require of ERMSs, for the purpose of determining the admissibility of electronic records as evidence; e.g., R. v. Oler, 2014 Aevidence; e.g., R. v. Oler, 2014 ABPC 130.

Ken Chasse, who recently commented on my last note on e-evidence under the Canada Evidence Act (as reported here on Slaw.ca), thinks that hearsay as well needs adjustment because of the malleability of electronic records.

A new iPad app, TrialPad, is specifically designed for use in the courtroom, as a tool to prepare and present electronic evidence at trial.

However, there 2 other cases in which the state of electronic records management was provided, prior to admitting electronically - produced records as evidence.

[iii] A more exclusive provision would state: «In the absence of evidence to the contrary, a record stored in an electronic records system that is not proved to be in compliance with the National Standard of Canada, Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005, shall be deemed to lack integrityevidence to the contrary, a record stored in an electronic records system that is not proved to be in compliance with the National Standard of Canada, Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005, shall be deemed to lack integrielectronic records system that is not proved to be in compliance with the National Standard of Canada, Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005, shall be deemed to lack integriElectronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005, shall be deemed to lack integrityEvidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005, shall be deemed to lack integrity.»

When 72.34 (2d) becomes an NSC, we can all oppose the production at discovery, and use of electronic records as admissible evidence, on the grounds that the ERMSs that produced them have not been certified as being in compliance with any authoritative ERMS standard.

Therefore I resigned from the project, as did the other lawyer - member of the Working Group specialized in the use of electronic records as evidence.

R. v. Nde Soh is important because the Court accepted the need to receive evidence on the issue of admissibility as to how the computer system that produced the «electronic documents» worked.

As to the use of experts in electronic records management, it is not yet the practice of lawyers to use such experts, but it should be because the Evidence Acts require it in order to use electronic records as evidence — e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) of the Canada Evidence Act, and, s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of QuebecAs to the use of experts in electronic records management, it is not yet the practice of lawyers to use such experts, but it should be because the Evidence Acts require it in order to use electronic records as evidence — e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) of the Canada Evidence Act, and, s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of Evidence Acts require it in order to use electronic records as evidence — e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) of the Canada Evidence Act, and, s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of Quebecas evidence — e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) of the Canada Evidence Act, and, s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of evidence — e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) of the Canada Evidence Act, and, s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of Evidence Act, and, s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of Evidence Act, and the Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of Evidence Acts of 9 other jurisdictions in Canada contain the same requirement (including the records provisions of Book 7 of the Civil Code of Quebec).

However, the Principles are not intended to place significant focus on records management (RM) or the importance or desirability of appropriate RM practices so as to be properly prepared for litigation, or on issues related to the integrity of information systems under Evidence Acts, or on the substantive law related to the admissibility of electronic records into eEvidence Acts, or on the substantive law related to the admissibility of electronic records into evidenceevidence.

It seems very clear to me that the photos were also electronic documents, not because they were taken with a digital camera but because they were proferred as evidence as to what was in the computer, i.e. they were exactly the same in law as a printout (or the screenshots).

That identifies a major reason for enacting the electronic records provisions that are in 11 of the 14 Evidence Acts in Canada, including Book 7 of the Civil Code of Quebec, i.e., so that electronic records, such as those created by way of such conversion of paper records by imaging into secure electronic storage, will in law be «original records.»

The improper procedure imposed by CGSB caused me as the Chair, and the other senior lawyer specialized in the use of records as evidence, Martin Felsky, [2] to resign from the CGSB committee that drafted what is now this National Standard of Canada: Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2017 («72.34 - 2017,» as of March 1, 2017evidence, Martin Felsky, [2] to resign from the CGSB committee that drafted what is now this National Standard of Canada: Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2017 («72.34 - 2017,» as of March 1, 2017Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2017 («72.34 - 2017,» as of March 1, 2017, pdf.).

«Records management law» will be a necessary area of specialization because electronic records are as important to daily living as are motor vehicles, and are now the most frequently used kind of evidence.

This article is about the poorly drafted proposed 2nd edition of a National Standard of Canada, which the Evidence Acts make necessary for discovery and admissibility proceedings concerning the use of electronic records as eEvidence Acts make necessary for discovery and admissibility proceedings concerning the use of electronic records as evidenceevidence.

Therefore, just as the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts state that in order to function properly, they need standards such as 72.34 (e.g., s. 31.5 CEA; s. 34.1 (8) OEA; and, s. 41.6 AEA), those new laws will have to depend heavily upon new national standards.

And because such «systems integrity» is a very complex collection of ERMS principles and practices, which collection is too big to put into a definition section in such Evidence Acts, compliance with the following NSC is the necessary test as to the existence of that required «systems integrity»: Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005 (72.34).

10 Where, on application, the Court is satisfied on clear and convincing evidence that a written document embodies the testamentary intention of a deceased individual, the Court may order that the written document is fully effective as the will of the deceased individual, despite that the document was not made in accordance with section 3 (1)(b) or (c) or 6 or is in an electronic form.

Not surprisingly, Fred von Lohmann (congrats, by the way, Fred), on the Electronic Frontier Foundation's blog, cites this «spam - igation» as further evidence that copyright law has become a breeding ground for «trolls intent on shaking down individuals for fast settlements a thousand at a time.»

It states: «an organization shall always be prepared to produce its records as evidence,» (clause 5.4.3 (c) of 72.34 (p. 17); and, section 4 (for microfilm) and subsection 4.1.2 (for electronic images) of 72.11 (pp. 13 & 21)-RRB-.

As a result, it's important you prepare to produce and request electronic evidence from the start of your case.

Electronic records management is a complex technology, which makes current legal infrastructure of statutes, guidelines, and case law that controls the use of electronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andElectronic records management is a complex technology, which makes current legal infrastructure of statutes, guidelines, and case law that controls the use of electronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic records management systems (ERMS's), and... [more]

Since 1978, I have acted as a legal advisor in the creation and updating of 72.34 and the other records management national standard, Microfilm and Electronic Images as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.11-93 («72.11»), derived from which, more than 50 compliance tests are applied.

Preservation of electronic documents on your own side of litigation is mandated by the same rules always governing preservation of evidence (such as ABA Model Rule 3.4), and also by specific e-discovery rules in place in the Federal (such as FRCP 26 (f)-RRB- and some state courts.

See these articles (pdf): (1) «Admissibility of Electronic Records Requires Proof of Records Management System Integrity»; (2) «The Sedona Canada Principles are Very Inadequate on Records Management and for Electronic Discovery»; (3) «A Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems»; (4) «Electronic Records as Evidence»; and, (5) «Solving the High Cost of the «Review» Stage of Electronic Discovery».

The talk will address eDiscovery — the ways that electronic data is sought, located, secured and searched with the intent of using it as evidence in a civil or criminal legal case.

Even if they do, there are new challenges on the horizon, including advances in technology such as the proliferation of smart phones, resulting in high volumes of electronic evidence.

Under the Motor Vehicle Act, an electronic or paper record from a speed monitoring device can be submitted as evidence someone was speeding.

It treats good records management as being merely, «helpful but optional,» instead of mandatory and essential to the effectiveness of discovery and admissibility proceedings concerning the use of electronic records as evidence.

And worse, the drafting committee of the 2nd edition of the «Sedona Canada Principles — Addressing Electronic Discovery,» will not compensate for the impact of the change (from pre-electronic paper records technology, to electronic records management technology) upon the efficacy of all laws concerning the use of electronic records asElectronic Discovery,» will not compensate for the impact of the change (from pre-electronic paper records technology, to electronic records management technology) upon the efficacy of all laws concerning the use of electronic records aselectronic paper records technology, to electronic records management technology) upon the efficacy of all laws concerning the use of electronic records aselectronic records management technology) upon the efficacy of all laws concerning the use of electronic records aselectronic records as evidence.

The best evidence, however, is an April 2, 1994, news article in The Baltimore Sun, Lawyers in Cyberspace, about how Venable «recently hung out an electronic shingle as a publisher on the Internet — making articles by its lawyers available worldwide to users of the far - flung network of computer networks.»

The article mentions this distinction as set out by Underwood and Penner in Electronic Evidence in Canada, which has been taken up by some cases as well.

In particular, the notion of an «original» document, as contemplated by the «best evidence» rule, was not helpful in the electronic world, being either meaningless or irrelevant to the purpose of the rule.

To the contrary of Sedona Canada 2nd, electronic records management technology makes these 3 concepts more interdependent in law and necessary application: (1) the «system integrity concept» of the e-records provisions of the Evidence Acts; (2) the «proportionality principle» of electronic discovery proceedings; and, (3) the «Prime Directive» of 72.34: «an organization shall always be prepared to produce its records as evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept&Evidence Acts; (2) the «proportionality principle» of electronic discovery proceedings; and, (3) the «Prime Directive» of 72.34: «an organization shall always be prepared to produce its records as evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept&evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept»).

See for example K. Chasse, «Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence», (2007), 6 Cdn Jl Law and Technology 141, 156.

(paragraph 9 point 1) The court also noted that there were «no generally acknowledged practices for preserving, documenting or securing electronic evidence», but on review, even the defendant's expert described the plaintiff's practice in this case as «picture perfect.»