Sentences with phrase «interpretation of the case law»

Clarke contends Bogle erred in his «strict interpretation of case law» and that «the process has not been fair to Mr. Coll.»

Ethics lawyer Gavin MacKenzie with Davis LLP says Harding's words were «ill - advised and discourteous,» but he agrees they didn't constitute a professional misconduct «particularly since he had a legitimate point to make about the inappropriateness of the law clerk engaging him in correspondence about the interpretation of case law.»

The Court of Appeal focussed on the interpretation of the case law which, if applied properly to the evidence, would have rendered a finding of there being no consent.

The second was the interpretation of the case law and the examination required with respect to assessing if there is implied consent.

There is some interpretation of case law about it (which is where the 1 year idea comes from), but not any definite guidelines from the IRS.

Not exact matches

«To the extent that the program does that, discretion and case law and interpretation become much less of a factor.»

Professor Hittinger seems to think that natural law reasoning in deciding cases has safeguards: «Virtually no one holds that natural law can be a tool of legal interpretation completely independent of texts and history.»

in the case of Iran, it is their interpretation of a book called the Quran and it's Sharia Law that is Anti-Christ.

That only changes policies and interpretations of the laws, it does NOT ammends the C O N S T I T U T I O N. Marriage is a Priviledge, an Honor and in some cases a Duty or an Obligation.

The main issue are the many cases where Russia believes that according to a strict interpretation of international law, the West was wrong but that nevertheless the West did have good arguments and some reasonable compromise was reached.

The key shift was in the 1970s, when the Court veered away from strict interpretation of the original meaning of the Convention and adopted instead a policy of interpreting the Convention creatively and, through case law, extending its scope way beyond traditional ideas of political freedom into questions of economic and social policy.

According to Hon. Kwabena Mintah Akandoh Member of Parliament for Juanoso, earlier this week he together with his counsel appeared in court in connection with a case he Hon. Akandoh and Hon. Ernest Norgbe Member of Parliament for Ashaiman sent to the Supreme Court for interpretation regarding Ghana's National Service law.

In cases where the law is not «clearly established» a subordinate may generally defer to his superior's interpretation of the law and the constitution without fear of civil liability in money damages to someone harmed as a result.

In describing prosecutors» case against their defendants — including Buffalo businessman Louis Ciminelli and former SUNY Polytechnic Institute President Alain Kaloyeros — the team of lawyers wrote of the government's «untenable» legal theory, «meager allegations,» and «ill - conceived and improper interpretation of the law.»

(c) And also for * submissions based on the assertion that Mr. Woyome had no contract with the Government of Ghana * and therefore had no valid claims against the Government be determined by the High Court, and not by this Court (the Supreme Court), since they do not involve, according to the relevant case law, the interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution and do not therefore fall within the ambit of the Court's original jurisdiction under Article 130 (1) of the 1992 Constitution.

Scalia believed his job in education cases was to read and apply the text of the law, and not allow his personal views on education to come in through the backdoor via free - ranging interpretations of vague statutory and constitutional provisions.

In this case, follow - up proposals might include a state - friendly interpretation of the new federal K - 12 law (the Every Student Succeeds Act) and scaled - back activity by the US Department of Education.

Mr. Lynn makes the case that Amazon's dominance isn't just a story of an industry disrupted by online commerce and digital upheaval, it's about the abandoning of New Deal era protections of retailers in 1975 (promoted by backers as a means to fight inflation, says Mr. Lynn) and what he portrays as a shift in 1981 in the Justice Department's interpretation of antitrust law based on «Chicago School» theories of efficiency and consumer welfare.

This case is extremely important It concerns the interpretation of the Ontario law and will set legal precedent

As was the case with Kansas City, it was a new interpretation of the law — not rewriting the law, that made the difference.

In summary, a strong case can be made that the US emissions reduction commitment for 2025 of 26 % to 28 % clearly fails to pass minimum ethical scrutiny when one considers: (a) the 2007 IPCC report on which the US likely relied upon to establish a 80 % reduction target by 2050 also called for 25 % to 40 % reduction by developed countries by 2020, and (b) although reasonable people may disagree with what «equity» means under the UNFCCC, the US commitments can't be reconciled with any reasonable interpretation of what «equity» requires, (c) the United States has expressly acknowledged that its commitments are based upon what can be achieved under existing US law not on what is required of it as a mater of justice, (d) it is clear that more ambitious US commitments have been blocked by arguments that alleged unacceptable costs to the US economy, arguments which have ignored US responsibilities to those most vulnerable to climate change, and (e) it is virtually certain that the US commitments can not be construed to be a fair allocation of the remaining carbon budget that is available for the entire world to limit warming to 2 °C.

The 2013 VW law judgment and Essent, even though decided on different legal grounds, both seem to move the «golden share» case law into a similar direction: in the former judgment, the Court shuns the Commission's overly expansive, instrumentalist interpretation of the application of Art 63 TFEU in the 2007 judgment, which the Commission would have liked to understand as a carte blanche for challenging all measures deviating from its preferred model of corporate governance.

At paragraph 26 and 27 the Court substantiates the reasons for this as the fact that the interpretation mechanism would not respond to the evolution of the case - law of the Court of Justice, and furthermore would not cover essential elements of the case - law such as direct effect and primacy.

Case Study: Interpretation and Uncertainty in Canadian Law Section 30.1 of the Copyright Act of Canada permits libraries to make copies of works under various circumstances for purposes of preserving or maintaining library collections.

It stated that various Dutch administrative authorities (in charge of determining whether a TCN has a right of residence) were applying a very restrictive interpretation of the Ruiz Zambrano case law to cases such as the present one.

The referring court wanted to clarify whether such a restrictive interpretation of the Ruiz Zambrano case law complied with EU law.

Lawyers will never know the true worth of these associations to law librarians, because they are only interested in the outcomes — the quick turnaround of locating an obscure case, correct interpretation of a scribbled citation, location of an old Explanatory Memorandum, the production of the legislative history of a section of an act, etc..

This is because the new version of the EEA Agreement established a new procedure to preserve the homogenous interpretation of the agreement through the EFTA Joint Committee monitoring the evolution of the Court of Justice's case law, and a mechanism analogous to the preliminary reference procedure whereby the Court of Justice would be asked to give a ruling on the interpretation of relevant rules in disputes between the Contracting Parties (Articles 105 - 111 of the EEA Agreement).

One of the first American judges to void a law deemed unconstitutional, Wythe's judicial opinions attempted to steer Virginia away from slavery, and in one case he even tried to abolish slavery via judicial interpretation.»

The recent case - law on by object restrictions has moved between a broader interpretation of this category to include more agreements than the traditional list of «hardcore restrictions», and the necessity to interpret the object category restrictively.

Nevertheless, the Opinion of the AG is not very satisfying, mainly because the interpretation based on the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter: ECHR) case law, does not seem very consistent.

However, the Court of Justice found at paragraph 24 of Opinion 1/91 that the «interpretation mechanism» whereby the EEA court would have to interpret the rules of the agreement in conformity with the case - law of the Court of Justice would not be sufficient to ensure the legal homogeneity between the EEA states and the EU Member States.

This tax refund case set the precedent in the interpretation and construction of local Philippine taxation laws on imposition of excise taxes to aviation fuel purchased by international carriers for consumption outside the Philippines and its treaty obligations arising from the Chicago Convention and various bilateral air service agreements with other countries.

Together with Bryan A. Garner, Scalia is the author of two books about legal writing, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, and Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges.

Our problem of unequal treatment arises from the fact that subsequently these interpretations are often only applicable to and thus relevant for the Member States, because the Court then «disapplies» the Convention for cases involving EU secondary law and the EU institutions, as you correctly state.

Meanwhile, blockchain technology is being used to provide electronic evidence to shape verdicts: instead of relying on a single judges» interpretation of the law, AI - provided answers to specific questions and clarifications relating to the case can help to disperse uncertainty in judgement.

The case involved issues as to the interpretation of DIFC regulatory law and claims against the defendant bank in both contract and tort.

The Court found that the interpretation of insurance contracts involves a unique blend of the general principles of interpretation applicable to all contracts and the unique principles applicable in the insurance setting.22 While courts have found that the «language of the policy» is the most important factor in determining whether coverage is granted or excluded, courts have found that where there is genuine ambiguity or doubt, the duty to defend ought to be resolved in favour of the insured.23 Similarly other insurance law principles should be considered, such as the principle that coverage provisions should be construed broadly and exclusion clauses should be construed narrowly.24 It was this last principle that the Court looked to in making a decision in this case.

In many cases, the loss may not be evident but will require deep knowledge and finer interpretation of the complex personal injury laws to prove the loss in a court of law.

CONSIDERING that, as any national court, the Unified Patent Court must respect and apply Union law and, in collaboration with the Court of Justice of the European Union as guardian of Union law, ensure its correct application and uniform interpretation; the Unified Patent Court must in particular cooperate with the Court of Justice of the European Union in properly interpreting Union law by relying on the latter's case law and by requesting preliminary rulings in accordance with Article 267 TFEU;»

Chris is regularly consulted by other divorce attorneys regarding the interpretation and application of divorce laws in their cases.

The PPO does not consider itself bound by the EPO case law or guidelines and is willing to use own interpretation of EPC articles.

This division essentially means that it is for the European Court to interpret EU law, whereas it is for the national Court to apply that interpretation to the facts of the case.

One of the key features of its mission and unifying nomophylactic essentially aimed at ensuring certainty in the interpretation of the law is the fact that, in principle, the current rules do not allow the Supreme Court to know the facts of a case unless they prove by deeds already obtained in proceedings in the pre-trial stages, and only to the extent that it is necessary to know in order to assess the remedies that the law allows you to use to motivate an application at the Court.

We see that the Court rephrases the question to concern only the interpretation of EU law, and not application to the facts of the case (as the Hungarian Supreme Court phrased it).

Another limitation is that you will usually have to rely on local or state courts, though it is possible to litigate in federal courts if the infringer resides in a different state and the amount in the case exceeds $ 75,000, or if the case depends on an interpretation of federal law (most importantly the Lanham Act).

With the help of case studies of landmark decisions, Conway then demonstrates impressively where the reasoning of the Court on the interpretation of EU law seemed to fail to articulate alternative choices and thereby created a sense of inevitability of the Court's solution (see e.g. chapter 7).

In essence, this dispute can be reconstructed as a disagreement about which constitutional right should drive the interpretation of the Directive and, by implication, the national law implementing it, as well as reviving the question of what should happen in case German constitutional law and EU law came to a real clash.

If the United Kingdom, having already triggered Article 50 TEU, make a unilateral attempt to revoke this notice, and this exercise of prerogative power were submitted to judicial review before the UK courts, then a substantive interpretation of EU law would be necessary to determine the question in the case.

If horizontal direct effect does come into the picture, the case entails a horizontal clash of equally fundamental constitutional rights, rather than merely an interplay of different interests in the interpretation of existing law.