Sentences with phrase «given issue on appeal»

Not exact matches

«Her Excellency Aisha Buhari has appealed to the ruling party All Progressives Congress, APC not to renege on their campaign promise of paying N5, 000 to 25 million unemployed Nigerians and giving school children one free meal a day,» read a statement issued on her behalf by Adebisi Olumide, her media aide.

Julian is progressive on all the issues that are important to this district — from women's rights to anti-fracking — and his extensive experience gives him a greater chance of appealing to an electorate that is far more Republican than what Congressman Hinchey faced.

Meanwhile the Court of Appeal has fixed November 13, 2017 for hearing of the Appeal filed by Dasuki in which he prayed the court to set aside the subpoena issued on him by Justice Abang on the ground that he had been in the custody of DSS for over two years and may not be able to give accurate evidence in the trial of Metuh.

Second, it gave parents and schools the right to go to an administrative hearing (and then on appeal to courts) on any issue related to the child's right to a free, appropriate education in the least restrictive setting.

In three days of testimony, Mr. Souter, currently a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, gave little indication of how he would rule on particular school - related issues.

As the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals in Emporium Capwell stated, the standard for trade unions should be the very highest one; «on the issue of whether to tolerate racial discrimination in employment... the law does not give the union an option to tolerate some racial discrimination, but declares that all racial discrimination in employment is illegal.»

Whether the issue is tracking Arctic methane or American stream flows, there's a vital need for sustained, consistent observations, but — unfortunately — there's a two - edged bias against such investments, given the appeal of focusing on science's frontiers and the tendency to target monitoring programs — which are akin to bridge maintenance — when looking to cut budgets.

It may not have the mainstream appeal of the story about the Georgetown Law graduate who sold his law degree on craigslist, but blogger, and Republican candidate for the Pennsylvania legislature, Stephen Bloom of the Believer's Guide to Legal Issues, has built a following around the notion of giving your law license to God.

For example, in the recent Liden v Burton [2016] EWCA Civ 275, [2016] Fam Law 687 (proprietary estoppel: see next article) Hamblen LJ characterised the issues on appeal as: «(i) whether the judge wrongly applied the law to the facts as found; (ii) whether the judge erred in the exercise of his discretion in giving effect to the equity» in the particular case.

On Aug. 30, the Court of Appeals of the State of Mississippi issued a ruling (via the Legal Profession Blog) in which it reversed the 2009 manslaughter conviction of Justin Thomas because the lower court refused to give a requested jury instruction regarding the castle doctrine.

On further appeal to the B.C. Court of Appeal, the Association argued that the legislative scheme (the Veterinarians Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 476 (the «Act»)-RRB- gave no jurisdiction to the Committee or the Council to «enter upon an inquiry into the issue of general discrimination or bias&rappeal to the B.C. Court of Appeal, the Association argued that the legislative scheme (the Veterinarians Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 476 (the «Act»)-RRB- gave no jurisdiction to the Committee or the Council to «enter upon an inquiry into the issue of general discrimination or bias&rAppeal, the Association argued that the legislative scheme (the Veterinarians Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 476 (the «Act»)-RRB- gave no jurisdiction to the Committee or the Council to «enter upon an inquiry into the issue of general discrimination or bias».

My sense is that given Justice Swinton's analysis on that point of law and the amount of money likely in issue, this case will likely be appealed to the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

-- STX Pan Ocean Co Ltd v. Ugland Bulk Transport AS (The «Livanita»)[2008] 1 Lloyd's Rep 86: Sole counsel on an appeal to the Commercial Court under s. 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 from an LMAA award giving rise to issues as to the applicability of a safe port warranty to a specifically identified port in the charterparty.

The Law Society, which intervened in the appeal, estimated there could be tens of thousands of clients affected by this issue given the similar impact of the Jackson reforms on smaller law firms.

In my view, others are also likely to be grateful because, in agreement with the FtT judge and them, and in disagreement with the Legal Aid Agency decision maker, this appeal is one that raises issues on which it is appropriate for the Upper Tribunal to give guidance.

In 2016, the Alberta Court of Appeal in Kohan v. Kohan gave at paragraph 38 of its decision a list of some of the things that judges should keep in mind when dealing with this issue (click on the following link to find it and scroll down)

The Court of Appeal upheld the Trial Judge's findings respecting the defendants» breaches of the Insurance Companies Act but allowed the appeal in part on the issue of the remedy to be given for the breaches Appeal upheld the Trial Judge's findings respecting the defendants» breaches of the Insurance Companies Act but allowed the appeal in part on the issue of the remedy to be given for the breaches appeal in part on the issue of the remedy to be given for the breaches found.

The Family courts have been bracing themselves for this Judgment since McFarlane LJ gave permission to appeal on 14 June 2013 (Re B - S (Children)[2013] EWCA Civ 813) and deployed the phrase audit to describe the kind of scrutiny of human rights issues required in public law family cases since In re B.

Given the many developments in this area over the last year, including the various pronouncements related to this issue by the Ontario Court of Appeal, employers that have not already done so would be well advised to turn their minds to ensuring that their termination clauses in employment agreements for existing and new employees are enforceable and will achieve the desired result on termination of employment.

Given the substantive issues in this case, however, it declined to decide the appeal on this procedural ground.

On the other hand, where the path taken by the trial judge through confused or conflicting evidence is not at all apparent, or there are difficult issues of law that need to be confronted but which the trial judge has circumnavigated without explanation, or where (as here) there are conflicting theories for why the trial judge might have decided as he or she did, at least some of which would clearly constitute reversible error, the appeal court may in some circumstances consider itself unable to give effect to the statutory right of appeal.

On February 17, 2015 the Court of Appeal dismissed Ms. Sampley's appeal, a finding that was not unexpected given the Court's direction to Respondent's counsel during the hearing, to make oral submissions only with respect to the issue of domestic vioAppeal dismissed Ms. Sampley's appeal, a finding that was not unexpected given the Court's direction to Respondent's counsel during the hearing, to make oral submissions only with respect to the issue of domestic vioappeal, a finding that was not unexpected given the Court's direction to Respondent's counsel during the hearing, to make oral submissions only with respect to the issue of domestic violence.

«[T] he weight of authority suggests that accurate news reporting — even when it is likely to have an adverse impact on the subjects of the report — usually does not give rise to an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress»: Yesterday, a unanimous three - judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a decision affirming a federal district court's dismissal of claims for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress asserted by two former undercover police officers against a television station in Albuquerque that had revealed their identities and their undercover status in the context of a televised report about their suspected involvement in an alleged incident of sexual assault.

Given the contradictory recent court findings on this issue I suspect the BC Court of Appeal will be asked to weigh in on the topic of insurers subrogated rights to costs following the successful defence of a lawsuit.

The trial and ensuing appeal was solely on the issue of negligence of the driver and whether the owner was vicariously liable for that negligence by having given implied consent to the operator.

With over 17,900 cases in our database and detailed information on the issues decided in those appeals, Lex Machina gives practitioners an edge over the competition.

The Secretary General must give reasons for the decision of the appeals committee and, if it has made a recommendation, may give directions to the board on how to resolve the issue.

FAMILY LAW — APPEAL — INTERIM PARENTING — Where there is nothing anomalous about the primary judge finding, by virtue of s 61DA (3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)(«the Act»), that it would «not be appropriate» to apply the presumption in favour of equal shared parental responsibility, while going on to make an order for equal shared parental responsibility ¬ Where it can be seen that the primary judge addressed what was necessary from s 65DAA of the Act, given the parameters of the dispute, and how the parties» respective cases were presented — Where the primary judge adequately and appropriately considered what she is obliged to in determining where the best interests of the children lie, bearing in mind that that consideration is framed by the parameters of the issues in dispute, and how each party has presented their case — Where there is no merit in the grounds of appeal ¬ Appeal dismAPPEAL — INTERIM PARENTING — Where there is nothing anomalous about the primary judge finding, by virtue of s 61DA (3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)(«the Act»), that it would «not be appropriate» to apply the presumption in favour of equal shared parental responsibility, while going on to make an order for equal shared parental responsibility ¬ Where it can be seen that the primary judge addressed what was necessary from s 65DAA of the Act, given the parameters of the dispute, and how the parties» respective cases were presented — Where the primary judge adequately and appropriately considered what she is obliged to in determining where the best interests of the children lie, bearing in mind that that consideration is framed by the parameters of the issues in dispute, and how each party has presented their case — Where there is no merit in the grounds of appeal ¬ Appeal dismAPPEAL — INTERIM PARENTING — Where there is nothing anomalous about the primary judge finding, by virtue of s 61DA (3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)(«the Act»), that it would «not be appropriate» to apply the presumption in favour of equal shared parental responsibility, while going on to make an order for equal shared parental responsibility ¬ Where it can be seen that the primary judge addressed what was necessary from s 65DAA of the Act, given the parameters of the dispute, and how the parties» respective cases were presented — Where the primary judge adequately and appropriately considered what she is obliged to in determining where the best interests of the children lie, bearing in mind that that consideration is framed by the parameters of the issues in dispute, and how each party has presented their case — Where there is no merit in the grounds of appeal ¬ Appeal dismappeal ¬ Appeal dismappeal ¬ Appeal dismAppeal dismAppeal dismissed.