Sentences with phrase «exercise of public authority»

Their idea of the rule of law is connected more strongly to the idea of limiting the exercise of public authority by procedural and substantive conditions, but their thinking often remains grounded in an inter-State context.

The mere fact that such an exercise of public authority has its ultimate origin in Union law is not of itself sufficient for a finding that there is a situation involving the implementation of Union law.

In my view, the competence of the Union to assume responsibility for guaranteeing the fundamental rights vis - à - vis the exercise of public authority by the Member States when they are implementing Union law must be explained by reference to a specific interest of the Union in ensuring that that exercise of public authority accords with the interpretation of the fundamental rights by the Union.

In effect, this case can be read as tacit acceptance of AG Cruz Villalón in his Opinion in Fransson, who proposed that the oversight by the Court of the exercise of public authority by the Member States be limited to those cases where there was «a specific interest of the Union in ensuring that that exercise of public authority accords with the interpretation of the fundamental rights by the Union».

Not exact matches

20.02.18... The Estonian state needs to understand the necessity of a state reform that would cut the number of officials exercising public authority by half, prominent lawyer and former Minister of Justice Jüri Raidla said in a speech at a meeting dedicated to the centennial of the Republic of Estonia on Monday.

Among them were pantheism and the positions that human reason is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood and good and evil; that Christian faith contradicts reason; that Christ is a myth; that philosophy must be treated without reference to supernatural revelation; that every man is free to embrace the religion which, guided by the light of reason, he believes to be true; that Protestantism is another form of the Christian religion in which it is possible to be as pleasing to God as in the Catholic Church; that the civil power can determine the limits within which the Catholic Church may exercise authority; that Roman Pontiffs and Ecumenical Councils have erred in defining matters of faith and morals; that the Church does not have direct or indirect temporal power or the right to invoke force; that in a conflict between Church and State the civil law should prevail; that the civil power has the right to appoint and depose bishops; that the entire direction of public schools in which the youth of Christian states are educated must be by the civil power; that the Church should be separated from the State and the State from the Church; that moral laws do not need divine sanction; that it is permissible to rebel against legitimate princes; that a civil contract may among Christians constitute true marriage; that the Catholic religion should no longer be the religion of the State to the exclusion of all other forms of worship; and «that the Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself to and agree with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.»

Lord Atkin's famous opinion in Ambard v. Attorney - General for Trinidad and Tobago [1936] AC 322, is apposite: «But whether the authority and position of an individual judge, or the due administration of justice, is concerned, No wrong is committed by any member of the public who exercises the ordinary right of criticising, in good faith, in private or public, the public act done in the seat of justice.

The new coalition points to a number of potential changes to the constitution that they would like to see, including the creation of a public financing system for campaigns, election reforms like same - day registration, court reforms to make it easier to navigate the judicial system and the ability for local municipalities to exercise greater control over issues they traditionally need state authority to manage.

But the report by the State Authorities Budget Office, a watchdog over public authorities and public benefit corporations created in 2009, found that the board of the Environmental Facilities Corporation did not exercise sufficient scrutiny oAuthorities Budget Office, a watchdog over public authorities and public benefit corporations created in 2009, found that the board of the Environmental Facilities Corporation did not exercise sufficient scrutiny oauthorities and public benefit corporations created in 2009, found that the board of the Environmental Facilities Corporation did not exercise sufficient scrutiny of the loan.

You have the right to restrict or object to our processing if we are processing your data based on legitimate interests or the performance of a task in the public interest as an exercise of official authority (including profiling); using your data for direct marketing (including profiling); or processing your data for purposes of scientific or historical research and statistics.

Whatever adjustments might be warranted to ensure alignment of the SOL with the Common Core State Standards can be made within the process through which the Board of Education exercises its constitutional authority to establish standards for the commonwealth's public schools.

In contrast to his authority in other areas, Williams exercised very limited control in the area of public education.

(2) signed by an individual, or his parent, to the effect that he has been denied admission to or not permitted to continue in attendance at a public college by reason of race, color, religion, or national origin, and the Attorney General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution of an action will materially further the orderly achievement of desegregation in public education, the Attorney General is authorized, after giving notice of such complaint to the appropriate school board or college authority and after certifying that he is satisfied that such board or authority has had a reasonable time to adjust the conditions alleged in such complaint, to institute for or in the name of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district court of the United States against such parties and for such relief as may be appropriate, and such court shall have and shall exercise jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section, provided that nothing herein shall empower any official or court of the United States to issue any order seeking to achieve a racial balance in any school by requiring the transportation of pupils or students from one school to another or one school district to another in order to achieve such racial balance, or otherwise enlarge the existing power of the court to insure compliance with constitutional standards.

As explained by the ECJ in its previous case - law (Case C ‑ 419 / 14, WebMindLicenses), the requirement that any limitation on the exercise of that right must be provided for by law implies that the legal basis which permits any interference with personal rights and liberties must be sufficiently clear and precise, affording legal protection against any arbitrary interferences by public authorities.

In this respect, the AG rightly recalls that, if this were true, the imputability to the State would not inevitably follow as Stardust Marine teaches us that, in case of decisions taken by public undertakings, the imputability to the State must be demonstrated by establishing «the actual exercise by the State of the supervisory powers which its status as majority shareholder confers upon it» or «the actual involvement of the public authorities» (para 99) in the adoption of the decision.

While a Member State may act as a shareholder in addition to exercising it powers as a public authority, it must not combine its role as a State wielding public power with that of a shareholder.

They also acknowledge the public's reliance on the integrity of the people who work within the legal system and the authority exercised by the governing bodies of the profession.

In the reasoning of the majority this case was among a number where public authorities had been given powers and duties to protect a class of person (the case of powers and duties of local authorities to investigate alleged abuse of children was drawn as a parallel) and in exercising those powers may cause loss to third parties.

Section 5 provides for the extension of FIA 2000's provisions (by order) to bodies not falling within the class of core public authorities, if they appear to the secretary of state either to: exercise functions of a public nature; or provide under contract with a public authority any service the provision of which is a function of that authority.

Section 145 contains the relevant provisions, the fulcrum of which is sub-s 1 which reads as follows: «A person (P) who provides accommodation, together with nursing or personal care, in a care home for an individual under arrangements made with P under the relevant statutory provisions (eg s 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948) is to be taken for the purposes of sub-s (3)(b) of section 6 of the HRA 1998 (acts of public authorities) to be exercising a function of a public nature in doing so.»

The public authority does not need to exercise actual control over the water companies; it is enough if the very existence of the public authority's powers has an actual impact on the water companies» decision making.

The first point on which he had relied was that any exercise of the power of amendment by the LSC would have to comply with principles governing the exercise of discretionary powers by public authorities, including propriety of purposes and the consideration only of relevant factors.

processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller.

No balancing exercise can, therefore, be carried out between the third applicant's concrete right to conscientious objection, which is one of the most fundamental rights inherent in the human person — a right which is not given by the Convention but is recognised and protected by it — and a legitimate State or public authority policy which seeks to protect rights in the abstract.

The effect is that the assumption by the Union of responsibility for guaranteeing fundamental rights when Member States exercise public authority in those cases must be examined in terms of a transfer, in the sense that the original responsibility of the Member States is passed to the Union as far as that guarantee is concerned.

There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well - being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.»

Such an exercise runs the risk of confusing the very different perspectives and principles which govern the exercise by the Court of Protection of its functions and those which govern the exercise by the public authority of its functions — and, in consequence, the very different issues which arise for determination in the Court of Protection in contrast to those which arise for determination in the Administrative Court.

When a public authority says something that looks fake even to a sympathetic reader — for example, that this was an exercise of a scheduling power, and not a reversal of Justice Wagner's decision — they make it easier for the «fake news» allegation to stick even in cases when it's unfair.

As a litigator, he has focused on judicial review work since 1993, challenging the unfair exercise and abuse of power by public authorities, human rights breaches and discrimination.

wouldn't tell the public that the problem is not the Law Society's problem, as in effect it does; (15) LSUC's website wouldn't state that lay benchers «represent the public interest,» which is impossible now that we are well beyond the 19th century; (16) CanLII's services would be upgraded in kind and volume to be a true support service, able to have a substantial impact upon the problem, and several other developed support services, all provided at cost, would together, provide a complete solution; (17) LSUC's management would not be part - time management by amateurs - amateurs because benchers don't have the expertise to solve the problem, nor are they trying to get it, nor are they joining with Canada's other law societies to solve this national problem; (18) the Federation of Law Societies of Canada would not describe the problem as being one of mere «gaps in access to legal services» (see its Sept. 2012 text, «Inventory of Access to Legal Services Initiatives of the Law Societies of Canada» (1st paragraph), (19) LSUC would not be encouraging the use alternatives to lawyers, such as law students, self - help, and «unbundled, targeted» legal services, as a «cutting costs by cutting competence» strategy; and, (20) it would not be necessary to impose an Ontario version of the Clementi Report (UK, 2004) that would separate LSUC's regulatory functions from its representative functions, to be exercised by separate authorities.

Continuation of a «right to provide» for staff groups to spin out and set up public service mutuals — though, surprisingly, this is not given any legislative force in the Bill (contrast this with the Localism Bill where local authority staff enjoy a «community right to challenge», thereby forcing a procurement exercise).

Public authority power The fact that the claimants were acting as public authorities exercising coercive powers of the state in carrying out its public function in respect of the centre did not per se put them outside the scope of RAPublic authority power The fact that the claimants were acting as public authorities exercising coercive powers of the state in carrying out its public function in respect of the centre did not per se put them outside the scope of RApublic authorities exercising coercive powers of the state in carrying out its public function in respect of the centre did not per se put them outside the scope of RApublic function in respect of the centre did not per se put them outside the scope of RA 1886.

These policies are consistent with the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which provide for mandatory detention of such aliens and allow me [Secretary John Kelly, DHS] or my designee to exercise discretionary parole authority pursuant to section 212 (d)(5) of the INA only on a case - by - case basis, and only where parole is in the interest of the United States for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.

Generally, following the increasingly penetrative analysis of the decisions of public bodies where European Convention rights are in issue and also the transparency requirements on public authorities, eg following the Freedom of Information Act 2000, there does now appear to be a sterner onus on public authorities to give reasons for their decisions, at least so far as is necessary to enable those affected by them to understand why the decision has been made and to exercise their rights accordingly.

So, Lords Mance, Scott and Neuberger won 3 - 2 against Lord Bingham and Baroness Hale, ending a legal saga dating back to at least R (Heather and Others) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2002] EWCA Civ 366, [2002] 2 All ER 936 where the Court of Appeal found that the Leonard Cheshire Foundation was not exercising statutory powers or performing a public function in providing care services to residents placed at public expense by the local authority under NAA 1948.

(e) processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller;

Where a local authority, in the discharge of its duty under s 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948 (NAA 1948), makes arrangements for the provision of care and accommodation by a private care home, that home is not exercising functions of a public nature within s 6 (3)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998).

The Court was clear that neither the Court of Protection, the Family Court, nor the Family Division of the High Court has power to regulate or adjudicate upon the decision of a public authority exercising its statutory powers.

This case will be of interest to commissioners, providers and care co-ordinators confirming the boundaries of the scope of the Court of Protection and that this Court does not have a role in adjudicating upon the decision making of a public authority exercising its statutory powers (for example, the execution of search warrants in criminal proceedings).

It follows that the mark - up is not an exercise of the government's public authority but of its private law rights.

Supports eminent domain authority only for a public use (e.g., ownership by a public entity), as well as a broad interpretation of «just» compensation, to include all reasonable and necessary costs which result from exercise of such authority, not just the value of the property condemned.