Sentences with phrase «judge saw no reason»

This same approach in which judges see no reason to create a complicated three stage test is reverberated further in Customs & Excise v. Barclays Bank28.

In any event, the Judge saw no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Appellants» third party contractor that he did carry out the rectification works and was paid S$ 150,000 by the Appellants.

Not exact matches

«We see no legitimate reason for our merger to be treated differently,» said McAtee, adding that AT&T is confident a judge will reject the Justice Department's case.

Reason I ask is, you told me you were «pretty happy» with your current provider — and that is a lot different than saying «we're crushing it with our current provider and I don't see any reason to change» — which is what DiscoverOrg's clients say, judging by our incredibly high retentionReason I ask is, you told me you were «pretty happy» with your current provider — and that is a lot different than saying «we're crushing it with our current provider and I don't see any reason to change» — which is what DiscoverOrg's clients say, judging by our incredibly high retentionreason to change» — which is what DiscoverOrg's clients say, judging by our incredibly high retention rate.

My friends and i go to a christian church and some of the Muslim students have gone with us just to see and learn for them selves what it is like instead of going off rumors and here say... Unless you have experiences something on your own you have no right to talk smack about it... The reason the world is the way it is is because people are to stuck up THEIR butts and THEIR way, to even try and become educated about anything else... im not saying convert or change your ways... But be educated about something before you talk because if your not you really look like a fool... ever religion, race, culture,... they have their good people and they have their bad people and you CAN NOT judge a whole race, religion, culture... off one group... that just being single minded!!!

For this reason I must reject the attempt of Lamar Cope («Matthew XXV: 31 - 46 «The Sheep and the Coats» Reinterpreted,» Novum Testamentum 11 [19691, 32 - 44) to see the passage as a statement of how Gentiles only will be judged — i.e., in accordance with their treatment of Christian missionaries.

Us pagans believe we are endowed with reason which allows us to judge whether or not someone can be trusted to deliver on their promises, if they are dangerous, or harmful — by watching their behavior - We judge — not some other being upstairs - Obama has shown his lack of human compassion and untruthfulness for 4 years, we have seen that his God is re-election money and that is at who's feet he worships.

As for his politics, i do nt agree with Obama's Policies and therefore pray he is not re-elected, but when it comes about God, Ya'll have no spiritual or earthly authority to Judge a man's faith for the simple reason that you really HATE his politics or the color of his skin, or the religion of a father he's never / seldom seen.

Who are we to judge what God does or allows he has his reasons who can fathom his ways he sees the end from the beginning and is not limited to time or space like we are.Does God want anything the answer is Yes he wants a relationship with us that is why he sent his son because he had a purpose in creating us.However the wages of sin is death in this scripture alone regardless of what happens here we all deserve to die God could have wiped us all out with another flood for who of us is worthy.It is by grace that we live and yes bad things do happen to good people just as it does for the wicked is it to test our faith i do not know but i do know that God gives us the grace to endure through trials and difficulty and that all things do work for Good if we love him..

On the other hand, we see little reason to doubt that Samuel did exercise a multiple function in Israel; that he did in fact combine in himself certain qualities of seer, priest, prophet and judge, consistent, to be sure, with his age and time; and that he performed substantially as represented the function of king - maker in early Israel.

But as he's entirely unnecessary to explain the world as I experience it, comes equipped with no proof for his existence, and is morally repugnant, I see no reason to base my life around the unfounded assumption that he's sitting around judging me.

If we shouldn't judge him in November, I see no reason we should judge him in March.

, If you look at AW's strikers choice, he always goes for tall strikers: Anelka, TH14, Kanu, RVP, Ade, Bendy.There must be a good reason for this, we cant judge Le Boss on his choice.Me who used to hate The Dane have become now to start seeing some nice pace on him, I just do nt know but his pace just starts to look better and better week after week to me.So, for now, lets just see what Bendy, Edu and RVP can do for us.BTW, I also like tall strikers, Big Fan of Peter Crouch and RVNistlroy.Kanu used to be my best, along with Kluivert.Ive just watched Arsenal agst Mdllbrg (98 - 99) Anelka with Kanu as strikers, 6 - 1 both strikers 2 goals each.

I have only seen people be judged around here for continuing to hold onto opinions that are not supported by facts, or for judging others as bad parents for dumb reasons, or taking risks like homebirth for frivolous reasons.

«I thought that if the court saw me as I am, utterly miserable with my life, powerless to do anything about it because of my disability then the judges would accept my reasoning that I do not want to carry on and should be able to have a dignified death,» he said after the judgement.

Albany attorney and former City Court Judge Thomas Keefe, who has been working on Balarin's campaign, said in the primary and now for the general election, he's seen candidates and their supporters target people who don't typically vote to encourage them to vote absentee — without necessarily having a valid reason to do so.

It is easier for young people to be honest if nobody you can see or judge them and that the reason for not more than that often people do not lie, the profile.

The unions suffered an embarrassing defeat when the plaintiffs won at trial — but the judge's ruling was heavy on political rhetoric and light on legal reasoning (see «Script Doctors,» legal beat, fall 2014).

One of the reasons that the AMBR contestants can have such active backstories is that unlike the Detroit - based Ridler award, which requires that the entrants be never before seen brand - new builds, AMBR rules only specify that the car has not been in a judged competition.

This fee news (& any resulting / potential impact) could prove a near - term headwind, but longer - term I continue to judge Record & its progress based on two key metrics — Total AUME (in particular, Passive Hedging AUME growth) & number of customers — and see no reason they can't maintain the impressive growth trajectory we've seen over the last 5 years.

So, if for no other reason, I can see why there was a necessity to give the poor bewildered judges a written guide to help them evaluate the dogs presented to them.

REASON FOR CHANGE: We have all seen scissored and trimmed dogs winning, and some judges do not see fit to penalize this.

HDR isn't a new concept - we seem to remember Half - Life 2: The Lost Coast boasting about it in 2005 - but for some reason it's back in vogue, and judging by the comparison shots we've seen, it's going to be something you won't want to do without once you have it.

oit is with indignation that we are speaking othis document is not acceptable • Bolivia owe have learned about this document through the media, not through you onow we are given 60 minutes to accept something already agreed upon by other states owe are seeing actions in a dictatorial way othis is unacceptable and anti-democratic owe say to the people of the world: they shall judge upon it othe rights of our people are not being respected owe are not going to decide about so many lives in only 60 minutes othis is s group of a small number of countries oAPPLAUS • Cuba o4 hours ago Obama announced an agreement which is non-existant owe is behaving like an emperor owe have seen version being discussed by secretive groups in the last hours and days oCuba will not accept your draft declaration oat this conference, there is no consensus on this document oI associate my voice to Tuvalu, Venezuela, Bolivia othe target of 2 degrees is unacceptable o... • Costa Rica ofor the reasons that we have heard, this document can not be considered the work of the AWG - LCA and can not be considered by the COP othis can only be an INF doc, it's just for information oadditional question: in an earlier version, a CP.15 - decision, para. 1: there was a reference to a legally binding instrument to be adopted by the COP onow: we have a new version, but the reference to legally binding instrument disappeared • USA o [wants to speak, but point of order by Nicaragua] • Nicaragua othere is already a precedent where we have not been given the right to speech onow that you have mentioned we finally want to speak • Pres. [moving on] oUS does not appear on my list any more, so next one is Sudan • Sudan othere must be something horribly wrong here oI pushed the button when I saw Nicaragua raising their sign in order to support them • Nicaragua othis is a deterioration of the democratic system oand this happens at the most important conference of the UN for many years owe have draft decisions about how to carry forward the process ostates (lists names) have written a submission: • this has not followed the basic principles of the UN • inclusion • bottom up processes • democratic participation • equality of states oduring this consequence, many states expressed their position against such approaches othe only agreement we recognize is??

When I visit «realist» websites, and I see people passing judgement on Judith's integrity, I feel the exact same way about their reasoning process as I do about people who presume, entirely unskeptically, to say that I have negatively judged Judith's integrity when, in fact, I haven't.

For reasons of professionalism displayed by legal people in high office, I am one who would prefer to see an overarching inquiry headed by a respected Judge.

If you have actually seen «The Great Global Warming Swindle» (which I seriously doubt, judging by the way you have used it to try to discredit Monckton), the reasons for Margaret Thatcher's support for green ideology are explained in full.

Despite this, in Migliaccio v Migliaccio [2016] EWHC 1055 (Fam), [2016] All ER (D) 144 (May) Mostyn J took the view — for reasons he does not explain — that what McFarlane LJ said was obiter (not part of his decision - making process), and therefore not binding on him as a level (ii) judge (see Lord Neuberger's Willers v Joyce list).

See also John S. Martin Jr., Let Judges Do Their Jobs, N.Y. TIMES, June 24, 2003, at A31, in which Judge Martin identifies the «unnecessarily cruel and rigid» Guidelines system as his principal reason for retiring from the bench.

According to a number of the articles I've seen on the web — I haven't yet seen the trial judge's reasons, Justice Herman wrote [quoting from a Toronto Star summary, here] that

See Vonner, 516 F. 3d at 387 (explaining that a «lengthy explanation» of the sentence chosen may not be required in all cases «because «circumstances may well make clear that the judge rests his decision upon the Commission's own reasoning that the Guidelines sentence is a proper sentence»» (quoting Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 357 (2007)-RRB-; see also Rita, 551 U.S. at 356 («The appropriateness of brevity or length, conciseness or detail, when to write, what to say, depends upon circumstances.»See Vonner, 516 F. 3d at 387 (explaining that a «lengthy explanation» of the sentence chosen may not be required in all cases «because «circumstances may well make clear that the judge rests his decision upon the Commission's own reasoning that the Guidelines sentence is a proper sentence»» (quoting Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 357 (2007)-RRB-; see also Rita, 551 U.S. at 356 («The appropriateness of brevity or length, conciseness or detail, when to write, what to say, depends upon circumstances.»see also Rita, 551 U.S. at 356 («The appropriateness of brevity or length, conciseness or detail, when to write, what to say, depends upon circumstances.»).

Where the claimant shows a greater than 51 % chance of success it would be surprising in any event to see his claim for interim relief fail; where the employment judge assesses the chance of success at more than about 40 % he ought to be required to give cogent reasons for refusing the application.

[40] A trial judge is not bound to accept uncontradicted and cogent evidence, although it is incumbent on the judge to provide reasons for rejecting such evidence: see Savinkoff v. Seggewiss (1996), 25 B.C.L.R. (3d) 1 at paras. 17 - 21 (C.A.).

21 In this instant case it is submitted on behalf of the parents that the judge did not even set out the findings, not least allow them to see whether she fairly and with significant detail set out her reasoning for coming to the findings she then made.

Mr. Sirota sees «democratic process failures» as providing judges with «the reason» to invoke the power of judicial review, and suggests that the presence of a failure could obviate the need for judicial deference.

Another reason is that many of the SRLs could afford a lawyer but choose to do it themselves in the mostly mistaken belief that a little internet research and mimicking what they see on TV has prepared them to convince a judge to see it their way.

One is too likely to see cases which are marvelously reasoned — but are entirely wrong in result because there was already binding precedent the other way which, seemingly, neither judge nor lawyers knew about AND, in any event, none got what the issue actually was.

For my penultimate next, if you want to see how great the disconnect is between what some lawyers and some judges think the law is, look at the Clements trial reasons, the factums in the Clements BCCA appeal — Carswell has them online — and the factums in the Supreme Court of Appeal.

He notes that there are good, practical reasons for the judge to be «distant from the parties and elevated», in part because the judge can then see everybody.

With respect to the «adult industry» stream, the Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding error of fact or an extricable error of law in the Trial Judge's reasons: «In our view, there was evidence in the record to support the trial judge's findings and we see no basis upon which this court should interfere with respect to the adult stream.&rJudge's reasons: «In our view, there was evidence in the record to support the trial judge's findings and we see no basis upon which this court should interfere with respect to the adult stream.&rjudge's findings and we see no basis upon which this court should interfere with respect to the adult stream.»

I see no reason to be worried about Ball's sentence — or, more generally, the fact that judges apply ordinary burdens of proof when resolving factual disputes at sentencing.

Answer: Judge Carton says it is not legit and that you should see his related and well - reasoned opinion in the «all - you - can - eat sushi case,» where the restaurant wanted to charge the customer more if the customer insisted on eating only the fish and no rice.

«[6] The motion judge recognized that the respondent had a «fully ripened» claim as of November 1, 2007 (see para. 71 - 72 of the Reasons).

For these reasons, many judges and highly regarded lawyers see Todd & Weld as the «go - to» firm when a client, family member, or friend needs a personal injury attorney.

[52] The principles underlying this reasoning are also reflected in the statutory regime for DPAs, which must be approved by a judge as being in the interests of justice; see further Section 23.2.1.2.

Cogent reasons must be provided for departing from the JSR — doing so simply because the sentencing judge wants to «send this guy to jail» is an error (see para. 16).

I'd love to see the reaction of a New Jersey Supreme Court judge to a factum that included this line of reasoning in its arguments: «We have no empirical data to support our position.

The decision, which was made by seven judges, is a good example of an early stage «strike - out» by the Court which is nonetheless a substantial, reasoned decision (see our posts on the «UK loses 3 out of 4 cases at the court» controversy).

The courts frequently say that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done, but critics respond that it is difficult to see how justice can be seen to be done if judges fail to articulate the reasons for their actions.

What can also be seen from these decisions is that, in appeals alleging this type of processing error, the reasons for judgment of the trial judge take «centre stage.»