Sentences with phrase «issue under appeal»

Dale told REM: «The only issue under appeal is (CREA and TREB) are trying to get their individual defendants out of the action.

The central issue under appeal was whether the Crown had identified a question of law alone (appealable) or a mixed question of law and fact (non-appealable) in accordance with section 676 (1)(a) of the Criminal Code.

Matters can become problematic for example, when a party does not understand that an appeal on one issue does not automatically involve the entire WCB file being reviewed, or when a party wants to file multiple documents, many of which are not relevant to the issue under appeal.

Brown J.A. ruled there was no serious issue under appeal and that no irreparable harm would result to the husband from the failure to grant a stay.

Not exact matches

Similar kinds of cases are under way in other parts of the country, including a case on appeal in Chicago after a federal judge issued a nationwide injunction barring the government from blocking grant money typically used to help local police combat violent crime and help victims.

As you recall, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an order vacating Rule 151A under the Securities Act of 1933.

Meanwhile, the BBC understands that another of the suspected attackers — pictured in a new French police appeal issued on Sunday — arrived in Greece under the name of M al - Mahmod.

Grandparents, cousins and similarly close relations of people in the United States should not be prevented from coming to the country under Trump's travel ban, a federal appeals court has ruled in another legal defeat for the administration on the contentious issue.

In August 1987, under FCC Chairman Dennis R. Patrick, the FCC abolished the doctrine by a 4 - 0 vote, in the Syracuse Peace Council decision, which was upheld by a panel of the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in February 1989, though the Court stated in their decision that they made «that determination without reaching the constitutional issue.»

The issue is that he died while his case was under appeal.

Having raised the issue of Neo-Liberalism and obviously finding growing decent in the ranks of the Labour Party, he thought he would camouflage the new Neo-Liberal agenda under the guise of Blue Labour, unfortunately for him it was again obvious to a lot of people not just Labour members, that this was not Labour and a swing further right to appeal to the Tories.

The Planning Board conducted a review of the project and on September 10 issued a «negative declaration» under State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) review, meaning that the Planning Board found that there would be no significant adverse environmental impacts from the project, and issued a «preliminary» site plan approval of the project subject to Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) review of «performance standards.»

The Board has 10 business days after receiving the appeal to reverse the denial, uphold the denial or under unusual circumstances, issue a notice extending for no more than 10 additional business days the time to respond to the appeal.

• School Expansion, Growth & Strategic Planning • State and Federal Employment Law • School Board and Nonprofit Governance • Administrative Law & Appeals of State and Federal Agency Decisions and Actions • Special Investigations & Legal / Compliance Audits • Policy Guidance and Development • Constitutional Challenges and Claims • School Employee and School Board Training • Litigation in Federal and State Courts • Administrative Hearings and Appeals Before State and Federal Agencies • Public Entity Purchasing and Procurement; Business Transactions; & Contract Negotiation, Review and Drafting • Construction Law, AIA Construction Contracts, Review and Drafting • Real Estate Transactions and Condemnation • Special Education under IDEA and Section 504 • Student Rights & Discipline Issues and Hearings • State and Federal Claims of Discrimination • State and Federal Civil Rights • Administrative Grievances and Hearings • False Claims Act / Qui Tam Defense for Local Government Entities

By manipulating commercial and industrial design, and presenting these issues as an appealing «product,» he hopes to heighten awareness of the subject matter and begin conversation under the guise of entertainment.

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — U.S. COURT of APPEALS for the NINTH CIRCUIT — Late yesterday the Court granted the hemp industry's Motion to Stay the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA's) «Interpretive Rule,» which was issued October 9, 2001 without public notice or opportunity for comment and would have banned the sale of nutritious hemp foods containing harmless trace amounts of naturally - occurring THC under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1970.

The only plausible objection to the PNAS paper, logically speaking, is that this entire issue falls under the «appeal to authority» fallacy.

Mr. Akyüz appealed his convictions, and the German court sent a preliminary reference to the ECJ to ask whether Directives 91/439 and 2006/126 «must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a host Member State which allows that State to refuse to recognise, within its territory, a driving licence issued in another Member State in the case where the holder of that licence... was refused a first driving licence in that State on the ground that he did not satisfy, under that State's legislation, the physical and mental requirements for the safe driving of a motor vehicle» (para. 35).

Nor does it just say the council may consider a ruling, issued by a tribunal constituted under the Human Rights Act or a court of competent jurisdiction under the Charter, that the university has violated the Human Rights Act or Charter,» the court of appeal also said.

[a] tax measure such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which is, according to the referring court's description of its history and purpose, intended to prevent excessive capital flow towards the Netherlands Antilles and to counter the appeal of that OCT as a tax haven, comes under the tax carve - out clause cited above and remains, consequently, outside the scope of application of Article 47 (1) of the [Seventh] OCT Decision, provided it pursues that objective in an effective and proportionate manner, which is a matter for the referring court to assess.

The relatively simple issue of whether an injunction should be granted (currently under appeal) masks the complexity of the underlying facts and legal issues at play.

So far, the television programme has not had to alter its name for broadcast in the UK, under direction that the High Court order would not take effect until the Court of Appeal had reconsidered the issue.

Courts have consistently confirmed this in relation to article V (1)(c).837 For example, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied a party's attempt to raise a challenge under article V (1)(c) to oppose an order compelling arbitration, that is, before the arbitral proceedings had even taken place.838 The court noted that the provision could only be invoked by a party opposing enforcement of an award, which was not possible in circumstances where no award had been issued, and also unlikely where the party raising the challenge was the claimant in the would - be arbitration, and thus not the party who would be in a position to challenge any resulting arbitral award absent any counterclaims.839

The judge who granted leave to appeal acknowledged the decision's «importance to the profession, as well as to the administration of justice generally», and described the core issue raised by the decision to be whether «pre-approval to use discovery evidence under one of the exceptions contained in [Rule 30.1] is or is not required»: S.C. v. N.S., 2017 ONSC 2601 at para. 8.

The court of appeals reversed summary judgment for defendant, holding that 1) the district court erred in its analysis of whether a witness's statement was made in reaction to a truly startling event, and whether the statement was made under the stress of excitement caused by that event; and 2) there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant's failure to remove the stump was a proximate cause of plaintiff's accident.

However, a court may reduce (modify) to include any of the requirements relating to probation and community control, a legal sentence imposed by it within 60 days of its imposition; after the receipt by the court of a mandate issued by the appellate court upon affirmance of the judgment and / or sentence upon an original appeal; after receipt by the court of a certified copy of an order of the appellate court dismissing an original appeal from the judgment and / or sentence; or if further appellate review is sought in a higher court or in successively higher courts, after the highest state or federal court to which a timely appeal has been taken under authority of law, or when a petition for certiorari has been timely filed under authority of law, has written an order of affirmance or an order dismissing the appeal and / or denying certiorari.

However, all of this changed last year when the Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision in Joseph v. Paramount Canada's Wonderland, 1 a case in which, under Ontario's new Limitations Act, the plaintiff's attorney failed to issue the statement of claim within the limitation period.2 The Court of Appeal unanimously eliminated any discretion that the court had to extend limitation periods based on «special circumstances» and held, subject to only a few exceptions, that the expiry of the two - year limitation period in Ontario is a complete bar to a lawsuit.

The Court of Appeal had no issue with the behaviour being both a regulatory matter under provincial legislation, and a criminal matter.

-- 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.

Unanimously allowing the appeal, nothing in s 103 (2) or (3)(or in the underlying provisions of article V of the New York Convention) provides a power to make an enforcing court's decision on an issue raised under these provisions conditional on an award debtor providing security in respect of the award.

Connor & Morneau offers comprehensive legal representation to employees experiencing legal issues in the workplace, and to organizations needing assistance with bargaining, arbitration, appeals, litigation, and other proceedings under labor law.

As can be seen in this appeal, the creation of national classes also raises the issue of relations between equal but different superior courts in a federal system in which civil procedure and the administration of justice are under provincial jurisdiction.

[13] The threshold question on this appeal is whether the justice of the peace who issued the search warrant acted on reasonable and probable grounds, as required under both the Criminal Code and the Charter.

On May 31st the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal issued a judgement with a number of broad statements about the proportionality principle and how it ought to be applied by courts in crafting discretionary orders under civil rules.

The last time this sort of issue came before the Court of Appeal was in Henry v News Group Newspapers [2013] EWCA Civ 19, [2013] 2 All ER 840 where the court granted relief against sanctions under the pre-April regime but warned that it would all be different after 1 April.

As framed by the Court of Appeal for Ontario, there were three issues presented on the appeal: (1) whether the appellant, as a former employee of Pitney Bowes, was entitled to coverage under the Manulife Policy; (2) whether the appellant submitted a timely proof of claim; and (3) whether the one - year contractual limitation period in the policy barred the appellant's Appeal for Ontario, there were three issues presented on the appeal: (1) whether the appellant, as a former employee of Pitney Bowes, was entitled to coverage under the Manulife Policy; (2) whether the appellant submitted a timely proof of claim; and (3) whether the one - year contractual limitation period in the policy barred the appellant's appeal: (1) whether the appellant, as a former employee of Pitney Bowes, was entitled to coverage under the Manulife Policy; (2) whether the appellant submitted a timely proof of claim; and (3) whether the one - year contractual limitation period in the policy barred the appellant's claim.

As a result, the appeals court ruled that the patent issues raised by Jang's breach of license claim were substantial and triggered «arising under» jurisdiction.

In B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, the Supreme Court held that, under some circumstances, determinations by the USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board could have preclusive effect in subsequent federal court litigation involving the identical issue.

In addition to providing an overview of new accident benefits arbitration process under the License Appeal Tribunal (LAT), which came into effect on April 1, 2016, Michelle will share valuable anecdotal discussion of what counsel have experienced so far on both sides, such as evidentiary and production issues at the case conference stage and before a hearing, what evidence adjudicators are looking for or emphasizing, the format of the hearing (written, oral, hybrid), witness issues, etc..

The issue before Justice Edwards of the Superior Court, and subsequently on appeal, was whether or not privacy breaches involving health information must be dealt with exclusively under PHIPA.

[1] Abella J. — The issue in this appeal is how to apply the forfeiture provisions for offence - related real property under ss.

ION opposed the petition largely on the grounds that the case was a poor vehicle for the Court to consider extraterritorial damages under § 271 (f) because of other issues in the case, including that the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board subsequently found several claims in WesternGeco's patent to be unpatentable in an inter partes review proceeding.

281 (1) After the Licence Appeal Tribunal issues a decision, the insurer shall not reduce benefits to the insured person on the basis of an alleged change of circumstances, alleged new evidence or an alleged error except as provided under this section.

51 An appeal lies from an order or a refusal to issue an order under section 49 or 50 in the same manner as an appeal from a conviction or acquittal in respect of an offence mentioned in such section.

The case presents two procedural issues under the AIA trial format: First, whether the PTAB should construe claims during an IPR using the USPTO's «broadest reasonable interpretation» (or «BRI») construction standard; and second, whether the PTAB's decision to institute review is subject to review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

This appeal turned on issues in relation to the right to education under Article 2 of the first protocol (A2P1) and the prohibition of discriminatory treatment under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In its decision, the Federal Court of Appeal considered four issues: whether the Colony of British Columbia had breached its pre-emption legislation; whether the Colony had breached a fiduciary duty by allowing the village lands to be settled; Canada's liability for the Colony's breaches under the Specific Claim's Tribunal Act; and whether Canada's post-Confederation allotments of Band reserves remedied any potential breaches and fulfilled any possible fiduciary duties owed.

The confusion is understandable, given that barely two years have elapsed since the act came fully into force and that the Court of Appeal has yet to pronounce upon the key areas of controversy, but nonetheless highlights critical access to justice issues that went unobserved and unnoticed under the previous legislative regime which thirty years» of case authority had fully illuminated.

In July, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that the U.S. District Court in Denver miscalculated his sentence under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines by overstating his financial gain from insider trading.

In Rocha v. Director, Ministry of Environment, the ERT again refused to issue a stay, pending appeal, of a doubtful Director's Order issued to an individual under the Ontario Environmental Protection Act (EPA).