Sentences with phrase «found for the claimant»

The tribunal found for the claimants on the issue of victimisation.

On the merits, it found for the claimant on all three complaints.

For good measure, Laws LJ added that, if wrong on this, he would have found for the claimant on her secondary claim of unjust enrichment by the trust and, although expressing no firm conclusion, seemed to give a favourable view to a possible third ground of breach of trust and confidence by the trust in assuring the claimant that the payment she was agreeing to had been lawfully determined.

Not exact matches

Winnipeg is coordinating with the Manitoba government to find accommodation for refugee claimants, the city said.

Reality: The plan was defeated in the House of Lords last month, with opposition peers coming together to argue that the plans could result in making it harder for claimants to find work.

It will become exceptionally difficult, maybe impossible, for claimants to find lawyers able to represent them in this technical process.

So, the unearned wealth of an individual who is fortunate enough to receive a large inheritance, or to have profitable investments etc, is rather different from the unearned wealth of the - for example - benefits claimant that has done between little and nothing to find a job (I am not saying all benefits claimants fall into this category, or even the majority; but to note that the system is occasionally abused is hardly a controversial statement).

In polling for the Policy Network earlier this year we found people already perceived the Labour party as being closest to the trade unions, benefit claimants and immigrants.

It is particularly important that the experience of the self - employed claimant is tested sufficiently robustly to find out whether universal credit can indeed act as a work incentive for claimants choosing that route.

«All of the government's targets for Personal Independence Payment — for claimants to receive greater support, and on savings and numbers claiming — have been missed, while those applying to claim the benefit were often left waiting for months and months before finding out whether their claim was successful,» they say.

your name, address and telephone number, and a statement that (i) you consent to the jurisdiction of the federal district court for the judicial district in which such address is located or, if your address is outside of the United States, to any judicial district in which Climate Central may be found, and (ii) you will accept service of process from the claimant who provided Climate Central's designated agent with notification of the alleged infringement in accordance with the DMCA, or an agent of such person.

In addition, even if the claimant had an arguable defence of necessity to trespass, the claimant's high - handed and one - sided approach to the publication of the video would warrant the finding of breach of the Code for failure to show respect.

However, the Judge found that Dr. Sovio did not address the chronic nature of the injury and awarded the claimant $ 75,000.00 for pain and suffering, $ 75,000.00 for reduced earning capacity, $ 22,000.00 past income loss and out of pocket expenses of $ 1,533.00.

Weighing the parties» respective fault the judge concluded there should be a finding that the injury claimant is 75 % liable for the accident and the landlady is 25 % liable.

Following an arbitration in respect of a repudiatory breach of an operations management agreement, the Respondent in the arbitration was found liable to the Claimant for around US$ 12 million in total (including costs).

[13]... the Court must answer the narrow question of whether it is strictly necessary, in order to support a finding of legally compensable mental injury, for a claimant to adduce expert evidence or other proof of a recognized psychiatric illness.

In today's case the claimant is found 50 % at fault for making a left hand turn, on a late yellow, causing the car accident which is the subject of this personal injury case.

Under the new regime, refugee claimants from DCOs will have only 30 days to prepare for their hearing, not enough time to find a lawyer and gather the evidence to prove their claim.

In Huck v Robson [2002] EWCA Civ 398, [2003] 2 WLR 1340, (an RTA case), where the claimant made a 95 % offer on liability apparently purely for tactical reasons and not because of the realistic likelihood of such a finding being made, Schiemann LJ held that:

One can imagine a situation where the employer has dissolved, the claimant succeeds in obtaining a substantial discrimination award, and the only person to enforce against is an admittedly discriminating manager, who, despite not being the employer, would find themselves liable for the full award.

A study by the Insurance Research Council (IRC) entitled, «Paying for Auto Injuries» found that settlements were 40 percent higher on average for claimants who were represented by attorneys compared to claimants who were not represented.

Claims for conspiracy, breach of contract and fiduciary duty and damages of # 2.5 m. Although the individual was found to have breached his contract, he was not ordered to pay any damages to the claimants and he succeeded on his counterclaim for an unpaid bonus and indemnity costs.

However, Susan Brown, director at law firm Prolegal, said: «Introducing a system which has no certainty of reducing costs and could equally well increase them, will undoubtedly lead to satellite litigation, will make it more difficult for claimants to find an experienced personal lawyer to represent them, and is extremely dangerous at a time when the legal services industry is on the brink of the major upheaval that will result from the introduction of alternative business structures.»

Another IRC study, «Auto Injuries: Claiming Behavior and Its Impact on Insurance Costs,» found that for specific bodily injuries, the average payout for car accident injuries were 3.5 times higher for claimants who hired a lawyer.

The judge, despite refusing the cost of pot for pain, was not prepared to award the cost of the pain program item of future care as he found that the claimant would be unlikely to pursue it.

The injury claimant was found to be totally at fault for a car accident at the intersection of King George Boulevard and 68th Avenue, in Surrey, B.C.. His personal injury claim was therefore dismissed and today I review the decision of... Continue reading →

The judge found that the claimant was indeed precluded by the certificate from claiming damages arising from personal injuries sustained in the accident but did say that the claimant was not statute barred by virtue of the s. 257 certificate and s. 10 (1) of the WCA from maintaining an action for his business - related losses.

The judge found that the injunctive and declaratory relief sought by the claimant was too wide and struck out the parts of the claims for relief which fell outside the scope of what was permissible on a collective challenge.

It argued, however, that the court should make a different order for two reasons: (i) because the claimants had been found 30 % to blame for the damage; and (ii) becuase of the longstanding practice in the Admiralty Court, which should be continued under the CPR, that costs should reflect the court's decision on the degree of blame which attached to each party, applying the provisions of ss 187 (1) and (2) of MSA 1995.

There were three circumstances in which the trial judge had found that the claimant had been exposed to a risk from asbestos fibres, namely: l from work done to a ceiling in the corridor of the school and the temporary stacking there of ceiling tiles for a few days, some of which were broken or chipped; l damage to the ceiling done by misbehaving pupils in the course of their bullying where they would remove ceiling tiles and push bags and clothes into the ceiling void; and finally l from vandalism to the girls» toilets and the temporary stacking there of ceiling tiles for two weeks.

In 2009 the court dismissed a claim brought by travel agents against the firm and Ms Advani, and found that Denton Wilde Sapte owed no relevant duty to the claimants and was not liable for the actions of Ms Advani as she was acting outside her employment as a solicitor.

In the context of quantifying general damages for respiratory disability, the general principle that a tortfeasor must take his victim as he finds him applies, and so a discount could not be applied simply because the claimant had voluntarily undertaken the risks associated with smoking.

If it were otherwise it would appear to follow that a defendant who had at least as good a chance of showing that he did not agree to litigate in England as the claimant had of showing that he did, would be likely to find himself compelled to litigate in England, on the footing that, once a good arguable case was made out in favour of an English exclusive jurisdiction clause, discretionary considerations would be unlikely to call for the case to be decided elsewhere.

On the claimant's claim for unfair dismissal, the tribunal found for the employer, declining to find it all a sham, but the EAT allowed the claimant's appeal.

For example, in Cabezas v. Maxim, 2014 BCSC 767, the Court found that significant unfairness would result from the unequal division of the claimant's purported excluded property given the respondent's contributions to the maintenance of the property, her decision to undertake liability on the mortgage, her greater contribution towards expenses, and the length of their cohabitation of 6.5 years -LSB-.]

Justice O'Connell found the claimant entitled to spousal support on a non-compensatory basis as well as contractual basis because the respondent agreed to sponsor her and meet her financial needs for three years after they wed..

In effect, he felt that the claimant's prospects of finding and keeping a job in the future were a good deal better than Ogden 6 allowed for.

In 1992 I started in personal injury law helping personal injury claimants and, as a personal injury lawyer now in British Columbia, injury claimants tell me that when trying to find the top injury lawyer in town they are left frustrated... Many have found me through a friend and very few said that it was easy to find a personal injury lawyer for their ICBC claim.

As regards the finding of indirect discrimination, the EAT accepted that the requirement for all registrars to perform civil partnership ceremonies placed persons of the claimant's religion at a particular disadvantage in comparison with other persons who do not share the same religion.

Applying the authorities, the judge made the following finding at para [245] of the judgment: «The question is whether there was something which would reasonably cause the claimants to start asking questions about the advice they had been given, not when they first knew they might have a claim for damages but when each of them first knew enough to justify setting about investigating the possibility that [the defendant's] advice was defective.»

The tribunal found that the complaints of victimisation by the claimant's colleagues, breach of confidentiality, failure to consider the claimant for a superintendent post and instigation of disciplinary proceedings amounted to unwanted conduct and therefore the harassment claim was made out.

Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers, who acted for the claimants, says: «[The court] has found that the Ministry of Defence have not complied with international and domestic law requiring there to be proper public scrutiny of these cases and the systemic issues arising from them.»

This point was then further considered by Slade J in Ashby where, although again a strike out was refused, she looked for a wider principle in these cases and purported to find it in the conflict of laws area of forum non conveniens, namely that an important factor in deciding whether to strike out under s 2 (3) is why the claimant did not bring tribunal proceedings in time; on such an approach, the reasonableness of the claimant's actions could be tested and if necessary the common law claim struck out even if that left the claimant with no remaining cause of action.

For example, in 44 per cent of the claims made to the RPD from citizens of Hungary, a DCO country, the RPD found the claimants were genuine refugees or persons in need of protection.

For instance, although a substitution clause was introduced in 2007, the ET found that the parties had agreed that the claimants would show up for work each day and that the respondent had agreed to offer work provided that it was there for them to For instance, although a substitution clause was introduced in 2007, the ET found that the parties had agreed that the claimants would show up for work each day and that the respondent had agreed to offer work provided that it was there for them to for work each day and that the respondent had agreed to offer work provided that it was there for them to for them to do.

The RPD determines whether or not a refugee claimant has established a well - founded fear of persecution for a convention grounds (race, religion, particular social group, nationality, or political opinion) or a risk of cruel and inhuman treatment.

The EAT considered the tribunal's finding in relation to the allegation that the claimant had committed gross misconduct evidenced a further misapplication of Igen, because there was no evidence to establish that the reason for the finding of gross misconduct was the claimant's religion.

The Supreme Court found that the defendant failed to take reasonable care for the safety of those, including the claimant by building too much slope into the ramp, not providing a guard or handrail on the outside, and not making some effort to enhance traction in the 6 years before the injury.

The court also found that the claimant failed to take reasonable care for her own safety because she knew there was no outside guard or handrail when she stepped onto the lower ramp.

Woodmere (Credit Valley) v. Sarcevich (1998), 40 O.R. (3d) 543 - although a lien was grossly exaggerated, it did not result in a successful claim for damages, since the trial judge found that the amount of the lien did not result in any damages (rather the fact of the lien, which would have existed whether the lien claimant claimed the correct amount) was what drove the purchasers of the property away, since the purchasers were looking for an excuse not to close.