Sentences with phrase «judgment scheduling court»

Not exact matches

Recently there was a Court judgment in Madras which granted the contention of a person who affirmed that he was a Christian by faith without change of community by conversion and therefore entitled to benefits ofthe scheduled castes of the Hindu community.

At the hearing of the appeal, Daudu faulted the judgment of the appeal court on among other grounds that it erroneously affirmed the competence of the proceedings of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, which sat on the appellant's case with only two members as against the three provided for in the provisions of Paragraph 15 (1) of the Fifth Schedule to the 1999 Constitution.

A statement by the chairman of the campaign organization, Sir Edwin Uboo in Awka, said that the organisation was particularly angered by Umeh's alleged continued deliberate malicious misinterpretation, misrepresentation and sentimentalization of the Court of Appeal judgment in Enugu that Ekwunife was disqualified from contesting the scheduled fresh election expected to hold in March, 2016.

An amended schedule of unsecured debts identified five debts totaling $ 1,575,000, including at least one substantial judgment against them in Los Angeles Superior Court.

In addition to the change in approach signalled by these rulings, the courts have recently leaned toward the use of summary judgment motions, which in Toronto must be heard within 100 days of counsel's attendance at Civil Practice Court, formerly called Motion Scheduling Court.

As the House of Lords is scheduled to vote on the Government's proposals for a residence test for access to legal aid, Angela Patrick, Director of Human Rights Policy at JUSTICE considers today's judgment of the Divisional Court in PLP v Secretary of State for Justice.

The important question of how much latitude judges have in Ontario to avoid trials by granting summary judgment under Rule 20 is scheduled to come before the Supreme Court of Canada in March in two appeals involving an alleged investor scam.

This week the Supreme Court handed down judgment in R (Public Law Project) v Lord Chancellor, in which it unanimously concluded that the proposed restriction of legal aid on grounds of residence under the draft Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Amendment of Schedule 1) Order 2014 was ultra vires the Henry VIII clause in the enabling Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.

As the Divisional Court recognised at paragraph [29] of its judgment, «if making a donation of the kind described in paragraph 2 (1)(c) of Schedule 15 also involves incurring a referendum expense, then only permitted participants could make such donations exceeding # 10,000, and only the designation organisation could make such donations exceeding # 700,000, without contravening the rules restricting campaign spending.»

At the end of the reasons for judgment in Alberta's first electronic trial in 1159465 Alberta Ltd. v. Adwood Manufacturing Ltd.the Honourable Mr. Justice A.W. Germain of the Court of Queen's Bench provided a schedule to the reasons for judgment in which he reflects on the process and some of the legal issues to have cropped up.

If, in the court's opinion, scheduling the summary judgment motion would not be a prudent use of judicial resources, Judges should be prepared to refuse to schedule the motion.

A few weeks ago I was in summary judgment motion scheduling court before Madam Justice Low.

They pointed to the fact that this was a contest between victims, and that the practical effect of the court's judgment was that they will recover almost nothing from the proceeds of the Schedule C Properties in which they invested.

As the Divisional Court recognised at paragraph [29] of its judgment, «if making a donation of the kind described in paragraph 2 (1)(c) of Schedule 15 also involves incurring a referendum expense, then only permitted participants could make such donations exceeding # 10,000, and only the designation organisation could make such donations exceeding # 700,000, without contravening the rules restricting campaign spending.»

The second option asks the court to vacate or throw out your divorce judgment and schedule a new trial.