Sentences with phrase «granted application for leave»

In February, the SCC granted an application for leave to appeal filed by Theratechnologies Inc. and two of its administrators in a securities class action filed by a shareholder who lost money because of the issuer's alleged omission to properly inform its shareholders of a material change in the issuer's operations.

In Dr Yeung Sau Shing Albert v Google Inc (No. 2)[2015] 1 HKLRD 26, the judge granted application for leave to appeal that:

Not exact matches

He pointed to Wisconsin's application for a waiver from No Child Left Behind, hoping to join other states that have already been granted breathing room from the landmark educational requirements.

Did you know tens of thousands of Florida's high school seniors fail to complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), leaving behind over $ 100 million in Pell Grants each year?

Well, Eli has seen it all, ranging from goodbye, to suggestions that the unfunded research faculty take a leave of absence to structured bridge funding programs, with the length of support depending on rank and years of service (read bringing in grants) Research faculty are driven to submitting multiple grant applications each year and for the most part need to get funding from several grants.

In addition to the hearing schedules, docket information, party information, case summaries, webcasts of appeal hearings and factums on appeal, the Court will begin to post memorandums of argument on applications for leave to appeal after they are granted.

The documents at issue were drawn up by the Legal Service not in connection with any pending cases and the Commission had only applied for leave to intervene, an application that was ultimately not granted because the cases were settled by way of orders, thus logically implying that if the court proceedings exception ever applied, it has by now ceased to do so.

In April 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada decided to grant the federal Attorney - General's application for leave to appeal the ruling of the BC Court of Appeal in SWUAV v AG Canada.

It held * that the extant application for leave to appeal and for a stay was no basis to refuse to grant the relief sought.

In the circumstances, the Court of Appeal took the view that: ``... save perhaps in exceptional circumstances, the court should not in principle grant an injunction but leave the matter to be dealt with by way of application for an ASBO.»

Whereas their applications for asylum were unsuccessful, they were granted provisional leave to remain.

The two were quite distinct, and Parliament clearly intended that s 24 (5) should only apply where a substantive application for the revocation of a placement order had been made — in other words, the applicant had got over the leave hurdle, and was making a substantive application which, consequent upon the grant of leave, would be likely to have been perceived as having a real prospect of success.

In granting Knecht's application for leave to appeal, Alberta Court of Appeal Justice Jack Watson wrote: «[T] he chief has an arguable case regarding the questions.

For all of the above reasons, CACL, jointly with CCD, have taken the unusual step of bringing a motion to intervene on the leave application, to ensure that this Court has full insight into the deficient and unbalanced factual record, and the resulting impact on persons with intellectual disabilities, in assessing whether to grant leave to appeal in this case.

Applications for Leave Submitted: number of leave applications submitted to panels of the Court for decision, the number of leave applications granted and the percentage granted of the totApplications for Leave Submitted: number of leave applications submitted to panels of the Court for decision, the number of leave applications granted and the percentage granted of the total submLeave Submitted: number of leave applications submitted to panels of the Court for decision, the number of leave applications granted and the percentage granted of the total submleave applications submitted to panels of the Court for decision, the number of leave applications granted and the percentage granted of the totapplications submitted to panels of the Court for decision, the number of leave applications granted and the percentage granted of the total submleave applications granted and the percentage granted of the totapplications granted and the percentage granted of the total submitted

(The motion to expedite the applications for leave to appeal brought by the Respondents on August 27, 2008, is granted.

Section 24 (5) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 — «where (a) an application for the revocation of a placement order has been made and has not been disposed of, and (b) the child is not placed for adoption by the authority, the child may not without the court's leave be placed for adoption under the order» — applies only where a substantive application for the revocation of a placement order has been made, ie the applicant, having got over the leave hurdle, is making a substantive application which, consequent upon the grant of leave, would be likely to have been perceived as having a real prospect of success.

Van Rensburg, J. granted applications by Her Majesty the Queen and LawPRO for an order under s. 140 of the Courts of Justice Act, declaring a particularly determined plaintiff to be a vexatious litigant and prohibiting him from instituting or continuing any proceeding, except with leave of a judge of the Superior Court.

The court will be routinely asked to grant leave for those persons to bring such applications and they will obtain orders for permanency for the child.

Employers who refuse to accommodate disabled employees by, for example, granting the employee a leave of absence to recover from a serious illness, will not be well placed to successfully defend against a human rights application.

Recently, the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench (per Justice R. Paul Belzil) granted Unifor, Local 707A (the Union) an interim injunction prohibiting Suncor Energy Inc (Suncor) from implementing its random drug and alcohol testing policy pending either a successful application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada or, failing that, the parties holding a fresh arbitration hearing in early 2018.

(2) Upon an application for leave under subsection (1), the court may, in its discretion, grant leave to the supplier or refuse leave or grant leave upon such terms and conditions as the court considers advisable.

The Belway decision by Justice Martin is a rare example of an application for leave being granted to a vexatious litigant.

On July 20, 2017, the application for leave to appeal was granted.

(7) In an application for leave under subrule (1)(b), the appeal tribunal may grant leave if it determines that:

Belway v Lalande - Weber is a decision that Justice Martin made in her role as a single Court of Appeal judge deciding whether to grant an applicant leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal; see Granting a Vexatious Litigant's Application for Leave to Apleave to appeal to the Court of Appeal; see Granting a Vexatious Litigant's Application for Leave to ApLeave to Appeal.

Following an application for judicial review in the Court of Queen's Bench, and subsequent appeal to the Appeals Committee, Prairie Valley further appeals (pursuant to an order of Ottenbreit J.A. granting leave to appeal).

Therefore, where the Consent Order involves a child, a leave application is treated somewhat differently, but the threshold for granting such leave still remains high.

The Supreme Court had granted SOCAN's application for leave to appeal and the case is scheduled to be heard on December 6, 2011.

In Potter v Boston, the Court examined an application by the husband who sought leave to appeal an interim order that granted his wife exclusive possession of a condominium, which was owned by the husband and located in Florida, for one week every month.

[10] This Court has no jurisdiction to suspend the precedential value of Grant Thornton Ltd. v. Alberta Energy Regulator and introduce another legal regime — the one in place before Chief Justice Wittmann released his judgment — for the governance of other bankrupts, receivers and trustees in bankruptcy and secured creditors for a period commencing with the date of pronouncement of any stay order and ending with the date the Supreme Court of Canada either resolves an appeal against this Court's judgment or dismisses the applicants» leave - to - appeal application.

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 10, 2016 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED.

Since, as the Court held, the material cause did not fall within the scope of «interpretation or application of the Constitution,» it followed that it required due certification for appeal, by the Court of Appeal or in a proper case, by the Supreme Court; and as such leave had not been granted, the petition was dismissed with costs.

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 8, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED.

(1) Before the court makes an order granting an application under section 102QE for leave to institute proceedings, it must:

(1B) An application for a divorce order in relation to a marriage shall not, without the leave of the court granted under subsection (1C), be filed within the period of 2 years after the date of the marriage unless there is filed with the application a certificate:

(6) For the purposes of this section, where an application for leave to appeal, or for a re ‑ hearing, is granted, the application shall be deemed not to have been determined or discontinued so long For the purposes of this section, where an application for leave to appeal, or for a re ‑ hearing, is granted, the application shall be deemed not to have been determined or discontinued so long for leave to appeal, or for a re ‑ hearing, is granted, the application shall be deemed not to have been determined or discontinued so long for a re ‑ hearing, is granted, the application shall be deemed not to have been determined or discontinued so long as:

In their affidavit in support of application for leave to intervene lodged in the High Court proceedings for Ward v Western Australia, the Goldfields Land Council quoted statistics showing that between June 1999 and March 2000 the GLC Future Act Unit received a total of 351 future act notices with respect to the proposed grant of mining leases, but between April and July 2000 a total of 5 such notices were received.