Sentences with phrase «individual party in the case»

A neutral party who does not represent any individual party in the case who will be asked by the Court to make representations from an independent viewpoint

Not exact matches

Yet here is the profound difficulty: In every other case I can think of involving two individuals whose rights conflict, none is resolved by legalizing the death of one party.

In the recent book, Civil Liberties Under Attack, one of the authors mentions the case of a government official with an impeccable record who was placed under charges because unidentified informers asserted he «advocated the Communist Party line, such as favoring peace and civil liberties,» and «his convictions concerning equal rights for all races and classes extend slightly beyond the normal feelings of the average individual «1

Were an individual Gloucestershire voter given up to seven votes to distribute as s / he saw fit, it is of course impossible to know whether this would lead to seven Conservative MPs returned (as was the case in the 2015 election), or a mixture of parties (in 2005 the seats were split three Conservative, two Labour and two Liberal Democrat).

A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual.

Individual members of parliament can push amendments and in some limited cases a small party (or a small group within one party) can threaten to vote against their block on an issue that's very important to them but there is none of the «getting the votes» one - by - one that seems to be going on in the US.

Regardless of the actual voting patterns in this case, any voting system in which individual members are all elected from a single geographical region, as is used in the Australian House of Representatives can easily have the party with most seats (and perhaps an overall majority / plurality) not be the party which received most votes.

In February 2017 however, Mr. Amidu withdrew his suit seeking an oral examination, explaining that the change of government under the New Patriotic Party under His Excellency the President, Nana Addo Dankwah Akuffo Addo and his Attorney General, Miss Gloria Akuffo's assurance to retrieve all judgment debts wrongfully paid to individuals Mr. Woyome in response prayed the Supreme Court to stay proceedings on the oral examination since he had filed for a review on the casIn February 2017 however, Mr. Amidu withdrew his suit seeking an oral examination, explaining that the change of government under the New Patriotic Party under His Excellency the President, Nana Addo Dankwah Akuffo Addo and his Attorney General, Miss Gloria Akuffo's assurance to retrieve all judgment debts wrongfully paid to individuals Mr. Woyome in response prayed the Supreme Court to stay proceedings on the oral examination since he had filed for a review on the casin response prayed the Supreme Court to stay proceedings on the oral examination since he had filed for a review on the case.

The judge, Anthony Yeboah, who made the comments cautioning both parties in the case, said the suit is about the human rights of an individual and therefore should not be unduly delayed.

Padavan has an ally in Mayor Bloomberg, who has long been a supporter of the veteran GOP lawmaker and appears inclined to continue to do so, even as he moves away from a policy of strictly contributing to the Senate Republicans in favor of backing individuals lawmakers on a case - by - case basis, regardless of their party affiliation.

If ever there was a case for voting for individual rather than party, it's @MaajidLibDem in Hampstead & Kilburn.

But she's especially looking forward to a publication forthcoming later this year in the Yale Journal of Law & Feminism titled «Telling Stories in the Supreme Court: Voices Briefs and the Role of Democracy in Constitutional Deliberation,» which will analyze a new, controversial form of appellate narrative argument: briefs that share stories of individuals not parties to the case at hand.

Students begin with an examination of the relationship between the individual and society, reflect on the way humans divide themselves into «in» groups and «out» groups, and dive deep into a case study of the Weimar Republic and the Nazi Party's rise to power in Germany.

It shall be a routine use of records in this system to disclose them in proceedings before any court or adjudicative or administrative body before which DOT or any agency thereof, appears, when (a) DOT, or any agency thereof, or (b) Any employee of DOT or any agency thereof (including a member of the Coast Guard) in his / her official capacity, or (c) Any employee of DOT or any agency thereof (including a member of the Coast Guard) in his / her individual capacity where DOT has agreed to represent the employee, or (d) The United States or any agency thereof, where DOT determines that the proceeding is likely to affect the United States, is a party to the proceeding or has an interest in such proceeding, and DOT determines that use of such records is relevant and necessary in the proceeding, provided, however, that in each case, DOT determines that disclosure of the records in the proceeding is a use of the information contained in the records that is compatible with the purpose for which the records were collected.

Neither individual parties (in this case traders) actually pay the bid / ask spread out of pocket.

State PACs may accept money from individuals and corporations in most cases and enable interested parties to have an impact on state legislatures.

Third - Party Fundraisers are great for groups or an individual who want to host or sponsors an event, such as a wine tasting or beef - n - beer where the profits or proceeds are donated to Faithful Friends; or in cases where Faithful Friends can be named the beneficiary of an existing reoccurring event.

Artificial changes due government coercive power exercised on the Fair Market to favor a single industry or private party are always in some sense anti-democratic (in that they influence the individual decision - making of buyers and sellers); a narrower case where the change harms a single industry or private group is less anti-democratic but still interference.

We consider that, through a range of approaches, attempts are being made to mislead third parties (invariably individual debtors) that their case has been referred by the organisation owed money to an independent law firm to pursue the debt, notably the «naming» of in - house legal teams in the style of independent law firms.

The Court's contention that EU law provides for a complete system of remedies, or at least remedies «sufficient to ensure effective judicial protection for individual parties in the fields covered by EU law» (Case C - 64 / 16, para. 34) has to be understood as a formalistic conception in the sense that BITs clearly provide more complete and effective remedies to investors than EU law or domestic law — and this understanding has been at the heart of the reasoning of arbitral tribunals in cases where they have rejected the argument that intra-EU BITs are incompatible with EU law.

There are many factors that will be weighed in any individual truck accident settlement, including the extent of your injuries, the length of time it will take for your injuries to heal, the amount of time you will be absent from work, the strength of your case, the amount of insurance held by the negligent party, and the nature of the accident itself.

In a mass torts case, you can have the benefit of pooling resources to sue a party that caused numerous injuries, such as an auto manufacturer, but obtaining an individual settlement or verdict.

There is a costs cap for both sides in these cases: an individual party will not be stung for more than # 5,000 and a group or organisation for more than # 10,000.

«Special contribution remains a legitimate possibility but only in exceptional circumstances... such a contribution can, in principle, take a number of forms; that it can be non-financial as well as financial; and that it can thus be made by a party whose role has been exclusively that of a home - maker... in some cases... its amount will be so extraordinary as to make it easy for the party who generated it to claim an exceptional and individual quality which deserves special treatment.

If there is no resolution, the OBSI has the can recommend compensation up to $ 350,000 in individual cases, but can not impose a resolution on either party.

(1) Regarding the formation and effect of a contract (excluding labor contracts; hereinafter referred to in this Article as «consumer contract») between a consumer (i.e., an individual, excluding those cases where the party acts as a business or for a business) and a business operator (i.e., a juridical person or other corporate association, or an individual in those cases where the party is acting as a business or for a business), even where by choice under Article 7 or variation under Article 9, the applicable law would be a law other than that of the consumer's habitual residence, when the consumer indicates to the business operator his or her intention that a particular mandatory rule from within the law of the consumer's habitual residence should apply, this mandatory rule shall also apply to the matters covered by the rule concerning the consumer contract's formation and effect.

In a relatively rare consideration of the impact of Art 8 upon financial provision, Peter Hughes QC sitting as a deputy High Court judge in M v M [2006] All ER (D) 58 (Jun) considered the impact of an application for disclosure from a third party and set out some useful guidance on the basis that Art 8 reinforced the principle that an order for disclosure was an intrusion into an individual's privacy that was oppressive and unwarranted unless it could be shown to be both necessary and proportionate to the issues in the casIn a relatively rare consideration of the impact of Art 8 upon financial provision, Peter Hughes QC sitting as a deputy High Court judge in M v M [2006] All ER (D) 58 (Jun) considered the impact of an application for disclosure from a third party and set out some useful guidance on the basis that Art 8 reinforced the principle that an order for disclosure was an intrusion into an individual's privacy that was oppressive and unwarranted unless it could be shown to be both necessary and proportionate to the issues in the casin M v M [2006] All ER (D) 58 (Jun) considered the impact of an application for disclosure from a third party and set out some useful guidance on the basis that Art 8 reinforced the principle that an order for disclosure was an intrusion into an individual's privacy that was oppressive and unwarranted unless it could be shown to be both necessary and proportionate to the issues in the casin the case.

Despite this general rule, courts have struggled with questions involving making owners of programmed systems responsible for damages suffered by third parties as a result of their use, in many cases due to policy concerns about imposing such liability... there is a significant difference between an entity that makes copies at the request of an individual and an entity that uses pre-programmed computers to carry out the request automatically...

In that case, friends or family of the incapable individual, or another concerned party, can seek to have the guardian removed or replaced.

If you have been injured as the result of the negligence of another individual or party, or have lost a loved one in a fatal accident, please call 877 - FL - INJURY to schedule a free, no - obligation appointment to review your case.

In the same way that plaintiffs are permitted to try their cases at the common issue trial stage with reference to expert opinion establishing a common causal link where there is some basis in fact to do so, it appears that defendants who seek contribution and indemnity from third parties will be entitled to the same procedural courtesy without recourse to individual prooIn the same way that plaintiffs are permitted to try their cases at the common issue trial stage with reference to expert opinion establishing a common causal link where there is some basis in fact to do so, it appears that defendants who seek contribution and indemnity from third parties will be entitled to the same procedural courtesy without recourse to individual prooin fact to do so, it appears that defendants who seek contribution and indemnity from third parties will be entitled to the same procedural courtesy without recourse to individual proof.

This has potential adverse consequences both in individual cases, where parties are unfamiliar with court procedures and do not have a lawyer to argue their case or examine the witnesses, and for the justice system overall, since the presence of lawyers is a major contributing factor to the efficient and effective operation of our courts.

For those parties in the group litigation who succeed in their individual claims, the logical conclusion is that they have «won» their case and, by extension, payment of their costs should be covered by the «losing» defendant; but in the event that the winning parties ultimately make up a minority of the larger claimant group, it could be argued that, as a whole, the claimants are the «losing» party, responsible for the defendant's costs.

In the first, journalists will be able to report on most details of individual cases, unless a judge restricts publication, but they will not be able to reveal «sensitive personal» information or identify the parties without specific permission.

This decision made in respect of a failure of lawyers to file a costs» budget — the opportunity to claim costs was effectively lost at the outset of the litigation by the failure to submit the costs» budget — is the touchstone for legal advisers and their clients in understanding the attitude of the courts to failure by a party to adhere strictly and accurately to the requirements of case management set out in the rules, practice directions, and the tailored orders of the court in the individual case.

Notable mandates: Represented physicians involved in providing care to Ashley Smith during the 2013 coroner's inquest; acted for Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne in a defamation action against Ontario Progressive Conservative party leader Tim Hudak and energy critic Lisa MacLeod; in Wise v. Iran, acted for a Canadian victim of a suicide bombing (executed by individuals who received material support from Iran) who sought leave to intervene in ongoing proceedings commenced by United States plaintiffs in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice seeking orders recognizing the enforceability in Ontario of judgments they obtained from a U.S. court against Iran totaling about $ 370 million; in Khadr v. Edmonton Institution, acted as lead counsel for an intervener, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, to argue that in interpreting Omar Khadr's sentence for the purpose of enforcing it in Canada, Correctional Services Canada was obliged to consider Khadr's right to liberty and principles of fundamental justice; acted for a physician in a malpractice claim in Moore v. Getahun, a precedent - setting case about restrictions on communication between counsel and experts in preparation of expert reports.

In the most well - known U.S. case involving David Lola — a reviewer seeking overtime pay that would not have been payable if he were deemed to be practising law — both parties agreed that an individual who undertakes tasks that could be performed entirely by a machine can not be said to engage in the practice of laIn the most well - known U.S. case involving David Lola — a reviewer seeking overtime pay that would not have been payable if he were deemed to be practising law — both parties agreed that an individual who undertakes tasks that could be performed entirely by a machine can not be said to engage in the practice of lain the practice of law.

[106] I conclude that, on a proper construction of PIPEDA, if the primary activity or conduct at hand, in this case the collection of evidence on a plaintiff by an individual defendant in order to mount a defence to a civil tort action, is not a commercial activity contemplated by PIPEDA, then that activity or conduct remains exempt from PIPEDA even if third parties are retained by an individual to carry out that activity or conduct on his or her behalf.

Bringing a Personal Injury Suit in New Mexico The above case clearly illustrates a situation where an injured individual may consider bringing a personal injury suit against a negligent party.

In addition, an experienced wrongful death attorney will know how to litigate your claim whether it is against another individual, a company, a government entity, or multiple parties, as each type of case may have unique legal issues.

First, some states use a summary judgment standard that is less favorable to the moving party than that in federal court.92 Second, federal court judges handle cases from start to finish, whereas many state court cases are not assigned to individual judges until trial.

No matter how big or small of a role an individual believes they may have played in bringing about the injuries they have suffered on another party's property, a Bardstown premises liability attorney can evaluate the merits of the claim, and determine whether filing a personal injury premises liability case is the best course of action.

Citing Watson J.A. in R. v. J.L.A., 2009 ABCA 324, the Court found that interventions in criminal appeals are «very unusual» because judges typically take the position that the issue in such cases is solely between an individual and the state — with no room for outside perspectives which may cause prejudice to the parties.

But remember, communication between couples is always a two way street (i.e., it involves you both) so if one person is unable or unwilling to communicate then this may be an indication that either a) the one who wishes to improve their own communication skill can work on that with their own individual professional (such as a divorce coach) or b) the couples who can not both agree to communicate with one another may need a third - party decision maker (such as an arbitrator or, in the worse case, a judge).

Litigators can use similar approaches to analyze the behavior of opposing attorneys in similar types of cases, the track record of different firms in such cases, and the litigation tendencies of individual parties in specific types of commercial litigation focused on specific legal issues.

Given that the damages sought in these cases is relatively small and the cost would be paid by the party requesting the jury, opponents of the bill pointed out that injured individuals would be much less likely to request a jury trial than a corporate defendant, who could have used the proposed law to avoid judges felt to be too plaintiff oriented.

Many companies, parties, and individuals who have been at fault in cases of causing someone else a personal injury, will tamper with an accident scene to remove evidence of their negligence or fault.

This depends on the individual case, but in truth, very few car accident cases go to court, because such an all - or - nothing approach can be expensive and is rarely in the best interest of any party involved.

Legal analytics involves mining data contained in case documents and docket entries, and then aggregating that data to provide previously unknowable insights into the behavior of the individuals (judges and lawyers), organizations (parties, courts, law firms), and the subjects of lawsuits (such as patents) that populate the litigation ecosystem.

Appellate judges in particular often preside over cases that have consequences for thousands of even millions of individuals who are not actually parties in the litigation.