Sentences with phrase «for discriminatory acts»

The court held that a real estate company that managed an apartment building was liable for the discriminatory acts of a janitor who was acting as its subagent.

The court held that a real estate company that managed an apartment building was liable for the discriminatory acts...

The «legitimation» of the validation provisions by the majority of the PJC is a political justification for discriminatory acts rather than a human rights approach to differential treatment.

Not exact matches

Some civil rights laws, like the Fair Housing Act, explicitly require publishers to assume liability for discriminatory ads.

The DC Board of Elections denied the request for a ballot initiative saying it would violate the city's 1973 Human Right Act, which prevents discriminatory ballot initiatives.

Acts, Act 197 prohibits discriminatory practices, policies, and customs in the exercise of the right to breastfeed and provides for enforcement of the right to breastfeed.

I support the Respect for Marriage Act and the overturning of the federal so - called «Defense of Marriage Act,» and oppose discriminatory constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny the freedom to marry to loving and committed same - sex couples.

«Please know that I have contacted appropriate federal authorities to respectfully request that Denis Troy and the Town Board of the Town of Orangetown, New York be investigated for discriminatory land use actions and policy in violation of, inter alia, Title VII Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964, and the Religious Land Use And Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA):»

70 However, this has been construed non-substantively and claims by individuals or groups, claims against governments who remain inactive and claims against private parties have been regarded as impermissible.71 Nevertheless, the CEDAW committee has finally recognized violence against women as a type of sex discrimination, thus making states accountable for «private acts» if they fail to prevent, investigate or punish discriminatory acts of violence.72

1912: NEA endorses Women's Suffrage 1919: NEA members in New Jersey lead the way to the nation's first state pension; by 1945, every state had a pension plan in effect 1941: NEA successfully lobbied Congress for special funding for public schools near military bases 1945: NEA lobbied for the G.I. Bill of Rights to help returning soldiers continue their education 1958: NEA helps gain passage of the National Defense Education Act 1964: NEA lobbies to pass the Civil Rights Act 1968: NEA leads an effort to establish the Bilingual Education Act 1974: NEA backs a case heard before the U.S. Supreme Court that proposes to make unlawful the firing of pregnant teachers or forced maternity leave 1984: NEA fights for and wins passage of a federal retirement equity law that provides the means to end sex discrimination against women in retirement funds 2000s: NEA has lobbied for changes to the No Child Left Behind Act 2009: NEA delegates to the Representative Assembly pass a resolution that opposes the discriminatory treatment of same - sex couple

It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice to do any of the following acts, wholly or partially for a discriminatory reason based upon the actual or perceived: race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, or political affiliation of any individual.

We successfully advocated for the 2011 Student Safety Act and the 2013 Community Safety Act to draw attention to inequities in school discipline and end discriminatory police profiling, as well as the 2016 ban on suspensions of students in kindergarten through 2nd grade.

Also, the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, approved December 13, 1977 (DC Law 2 - 38; DC Official Code § 2 - 1402.11 (2006), as amended) states the following: Pertinent section of DC Code § 2 - 1402.11: It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice to do any of the following acts, wholly or partially for a discriminatory reason based upon the actual or perceived: race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, or political affiliation of any individual.

-- For purposes of paragraph (2)(C), in determining whether a first or subsequent violation has occurred, a determination in a single action, by judgment or settlement, that the covered entity has engaged in more than one discriminatory act shall be counted as a single violation.

Any property imported from a foreign country for which an Executive Order is in effect because the country maintains trade restrictions or engages in other discriminatory acts.

Act as public educators and advocates for appropriate use of service dogs, with particular focus on psychiatric service dog partnership, which is often less - familiar and subject to discriminatory practice

You will not, and will not allow or authorize others to, use the Services or the Sites to take any actions that: (i) infringe on any third party's copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other proprietary rights or rights of publicity or privacy; (ii) violate any applicable law, statute, ordinance or regulation (including those regarding export control); (iii) are defamatory, trade libelous, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, stalking, harassment, abusive, tortuous, hateful, discriminatory based on race, ethnicity, gender, sex or disability, pornographic or obscene; (iv) interfere with or disrupt any services or equipment with the intent of causing an excessive or disproportionate load on the Animal League or its licensors or suppliers» infrastructure; (v) involve knowingly distributing viruses, Trojan horses, worms, or other similar harmful or deleterious programming routines; (vi) involve the preparation and / or distribution of «junk mail», «spam», «chain letters», «pyramid schemes» or other deceptive online marketing practices or any unsolicited bulk email or unsolicited commercial email or otherwise in a manner that violate the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (CAN - SPAM Act of 2003); (vii) would encourage conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, federal or international laws, rules or regulations; (viii) involve the unauthorized entry to any machine accessible via the Services or interfere with the Sites or any servers or networks connected to the Sites or disobey any requirements, procedures, policies or regulations of networks connected to the Sites, or attempt to breach the security of or disrupt Internet communications on the Sites (including without limitation accessing data to which you are not the intended recipient or logging into a server or account for which you are not expressly authorized); (ix) impersonate any person or entity, including, without limitation, one of the Animal League's or other's officers or employees, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity; (x) forge headers or otherwise manipulate identifiers in order to disguise the origin of any information transmitted through the Sites; (xi) collect or store personal data about other Animal League members, Site users or attempt to gain access to other Animal League members information, or otherwise mine information about Animal League members, Site users, or the Sites; (xii) execute any form of network monitoring or run a network analyzer or packet sniffer or other technology to intercept, decode, mine or display any packets used to communicate between the Sites» servers or any data not intended for you; (xiii) attempt to circumvent authentication or security of any content, host, network or account («cracking») on or from the Sites; or (xiv) are contrary to the Animal League's public image, goodwill, reputation or mission or otherwise not in furtherance of the Animal Leagues stated purposes.

The test to determine discriminatory conduct, in this case direct age discrimination, is set out in reg 3 of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1031)(which is now repealed and set out in s 13 (1) and (2) of the Equality Act 2010): «For the purposes of these Regulations, a person («A») discriminates against another person («B») if, on the grounds of B's age, A treats B less favourably than he treats or would treat other persons,... and A can not show the treatment or, as the case may be, provision, criterion or practice to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.»

As you may recall, in a 5 - 4 decision back in 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that Ledbetter's claim against her employer for paying her less than her male counterparts because of her gender was time barred because her present lower pay arose out of salary decisions made years earlier, well outside of the 180 - day statute of limitations for discriminatory employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

There are yet to be any cases to assess whether it is discriminatory for employers to enhance maternity pay but not shared parental pay although we would urge all employers to act with caution if offering different rates of pay to males and females when taking any type of family friendly leave.

Recommendation: That physical handicap be made a proscribed ground of discrimination for all discriminatory practices listed in the Canadian Human Rights Act, and not just for discriminatory employment practices.

DiGiuseppe Law is working with the Civil Campaign for Cannabis Amnesty to target discriminatory aspects of Bill C - 45 The Cannabis Act.

The court's order (released today) regards the South Carolina law as «not [having] a discriminatory retrogressive effect,» and that the Act «allows citizens with non-photo voter registration cards to still vote without a photo ID so long as they state the reason for not having obtained one.»

Writing for the majority of five justices, Justice Alito reasoned that the prohibited discriminatory act occurred at the time that the salary decisions were made, and not at the time years later when the cumulative impacts were realized.

The 11th Circuit reversed on appeal, arguing that the bulk of her claim reached back to salary decisions made years earlier, well outside of the 180 - day limit for raising claims of discriminatory employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

The exemption from rates in para 11 of Sch 5 to the Local Government Finance Act 1988 (LGFA 1988) in respect of «place of public religious worship» can not apply to places used for religious worship from which the public is excluded; such exclusion is not discriminatory on religious grounds.

To amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes.

The Court of Appeal of Quebec struck down the lower court decision, partly on the grounds that the Quebec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission (acting for Mr. Latif) failed to show the causal link between his ethnic or national origin and the discriminatory practice, and that the U.S. policy aimed at non-U.S. citizens in general and did not target Muslims or Arabs.

To find otherwise would mean that a prospective employer could refuse to hire someone for discriminatory reasons and defend their act of discrimination by saying that there was no employment contract.

The bill's stated purpose is «to amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes.»

Won judgment for telecommunications company alleging imposition of discriminatory universal connectivity charges in violation of the Federal Communications Act

An issue that may fall for consideration in due course is whether an employer's actions in similar circumstances would amount to aiding and abetting a discriminatory act.

On November 16, 2011, the commission tabled a legal opinion (in French) demanding that Revenu Québec amend section 1029.8.116.16 of the Taxation Act to eliminate the obligation to register for direct deposit as a condition to obtain the solidarity tax credit, as this measure is discriminatory and infringes the right to equality under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.

They also considered whether it is necessary to show that a protected characteristic was the «material cause» of a difference in treatment, in order for a claimant to demonstrate that a policy is indirectly discriminatory pursuant to the Equality Act 2010, s 19 (2).

Counsel for Stewart initiated a human rights proceeding on the basis that his addiction constituted a disability, and that his termination was discriminatory under the Alberta Human Rights Act.

That said, recent Tribunal decisions have found that an employer will not have breached the Code for failing to investigate a complaint of workplace discrimination if no discriminatory act occurred.

Aside from the Indian Act which I continue to believe is Canada's most discriminatory legislation (it is pretty hard to argue that the Indian Act's legislative purpose was anything other than to contain and control the Indian peoples of Canada — of course, this is a conversation for a different day), I can think of no other provincial or federal legislation that is as overtly discriminatory as Bill 62.

Further, the EAT said that the Ministry of Defence was not acting in a discriminatory manner by giving preference to its at risk employees when considering candidates for the role.

Federally - regulated employers covered under the Canada Human Rights Act (the CHRA applies only to matters that fall within federal jurisdiction) must remember that they will be responsible for discriminatory comments their employees make on their own or at the employer's request and they must make themselves and their employees aware of discrimination and human rights responsibilities based on gender identity and gender expression.

When the Supreme Court upheld the Indian Act's discriminatory provisions on Indian status for women, Sandra Lovelace took her case before the UN Human Rights Committee, which, in 1981, found Canada in breach of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

(1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

Hate messages - It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

[ii] While intention is not relevant in determining an appropriate remedy for a violation of the Ontario Human Rights Code, it is relevant federally when determining the appropriate remedy for a contravention of the Canadian Human Rights Act, where section 53 (3) provides that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal may award up to $ 20,000.00 in additional compensation if the Tribunal finds that the respondent «has engaged in the discriminatory practice wilfully or recklessly».

anonymous sperm donors) At issue was whether provincial legislation (Adoption Act) that provided mechanisms by which adult adopted children (adoptee (s)-RRB- could obtain information about their biological parents was discriminatory and violated the provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, because similar provisions had not been enacted for the benefit of adults conceived using sperm from an anonymous donor (donor offspring).

The most important safeguards for those who report any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal or not correct within an organisation (that could be either private or public) are protection of identity, no reprisal in the work environment and no discriminatory acts.

The Casebook also includes court decisions from Canada: Haig v. Canada (1992)(omission of sexual orientation in the Canadian Human Rights Act is discriminatory); Egan v. Canada (1995)(whether exclusion of same - sex relationships from the definition of common law spouse violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 15 prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation); Vriend v. Alberta (1998)(college laboratory instructor dismissed because of his homosexuality); Hall v. Powers (2002)(student refused permission to attend a prom at a Catholic high school with his boyfriend); Halpern et al. v. Attorney General of Canada (2003)(whether denial of marriage licenses to same - sex couples based on the common law definition of marriage was discriminatory under the Charter; a postscript indicates that the 2005 Civil Marriage Act provided for gender - neutral definition of marriage).

As public positions like these, which are viewed by various groups in society as discriminatory or hateful, are potentially not only contrary to the Statement of Principles that lawyers will be required to adopt, but also a breach of their existing obligations under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Law Society should immediately take steps to investigate and, if necessary, publicly censure the lawyers cited above for their failure to advance the administration of justice by joining other MPs of good will in voting to condemn the hateful acts of certain members of the public.

They said that the legislation deliberately gave protection only from acts by the employer and did not cover acts by fellow employees (unlike, for example, the laws on discriminatory harassment where the individual harasser can also be liable).

The Act failed in a s. 1 analysis because it did not provide sufficiently clear and sufficient standards to avoid arbitrary or discriminatory application for a section of the statute which allows for a protection order where «there are reasonable grounds to believe that the respondent will engage in cyberbullying of the subject in the future.»

All the insured persons under this policy are eligible for cover against cases of sexual harassment, wrongful termination, discriminatory acts and other acts that might incur loss to the organization.