Sentences with phrase «judicial decision making with»

Not exact matches

Among them are the rights to: bullet joint parenting; bullet joint adoption; bullet joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents); bullet status as next - of - kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent; bullet joint insurance policies for home, auto and health; bullet dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support; bullet immigration and residency for partners from other countries; bullet inheritance automatically in the absence of a will; bullet joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment; bullet inheritance of jointly - owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate); bullet benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare; bullet spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home; bullet veterans» discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns; bullet joint filing of customs claims when traveling; bullet wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children; bullet bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child; bullet decision - making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her; bullet crime victims» recovery benefits; bullet loss of consortium tort benefits; bullet domestic violence protection orders; bullet judicial protections and evidentiary immunity; bullet and more...

Unconscionable conduct (agrees with NFF that they have not provided protection and support reforms «to provide transparency in the supply chain» and recognise that «certain classes of suppliers... are predisposed to suffering from a special disadvantage...»; misuse of market power (legal framework must «level the balance of market power in negotiations...», «ensure transparency in the transmission of market prices» and «not allow for final market risks to be borne by the primary producer» and provide «transparency of contract processes» - specifically, Canegrowers supports effects test and a process giving ACCC greater power to «regulate anti-competitive behaviour and impose penalties», shifting «the decisions framework from the judicial system to a regulatory system» which would make it more accessible to small producers); collective bargaining (notes limits of Sugar Industry Act (Qld); authorisation and notification approval costly and limited and not a viable alternative - peak bodies should be able to «commence and progress collective bargaining with mills on behalf of their members» and current threshold too restrictive)» competitive neutrality (mixed outcomes - perverse outcomes in the case of natural monopolies - suggest remove «application of competitive neutrality provisions to natural monopoly essential services»)

A free school threatened with closure has asked education secretary Nicky Morgan to remove herself from the decision - making process and threatened a judicial review if she remains involved.

The aim, for example, to broaden the range of judicial decisions that are made by non-judges (and even non-lawyers), under the «supervision» of judges, is more concerned with greater centralisation of services and with savings in the judicial salaries budget.

Whatever the outcome it needs to be recognised that policy views of the extent to which courts and tribunals should be able to interfere with business decisions will determine whether any change in the law, judicial or legislative is made.

Two questions arose: (i) whether s 204 contained an express requirement under which the county court was required by an enactment to make a decision applying the principles that were applied by the court on an application for judicial review, thus placing s 204 appeals within the public law category; and (ii) if not, whether there were any other reasons requiring the application of judicial review principles with the result that s 204 appeals fell within the post-LASPO 2012 civil legal aid regime.

This «hard line» position of non-disclosure is difficult to reconcile with some Canadian studies that have already described the judicial decision - making process at the Supreme Court of Canada.

What I said in relation to that was: «Over time, a minimalist approach to judicial decision making is likely to stultify the growth of the law and leave practitioners with a body of precedent that is very fact - oriented, giving little guidance to how future cases will be decided.»

The respondent in judicial review who seeks to defend the statutory decision will usually assert that reasonableness be applied as the standard of review, such that the reviewing court affords deference to the decision and making it less likely the court will interfere with the decision.

Lord Woolf arguably supplied a judicial tool - kit with many if not all of the tools required to make robust decisions on case management, including cutting cases down to size where appropriate.

In some cases, negotiating with the Home Office or making a fresh application is the fastest resolution while others require more extreme measures, such as challenging a Home Office decision in an appeal or by Judicial Review.

More, it was made possible that families could choose to work with a Parenting Coordinator (PC) that had judicial authority to make legally binding decisions for the family and / or be ordered to have to work with a PC in order that high conflict families and most importantly the children of high conflict families were not stalemated.

Unlike the process in many provinces for appointments to the provincial court [see provincial court process sidebar below], there is no short list drawn up for a specific judicial opening nor are there interviews with candidates before a final decision is made.

While this new approach may improve police relations with racialized communities, Tanovich's point that such discourse rarely makes it into judicial decisions still holds true.

It ought, therefore, to be made in accordance with the kind of process appropriate for judicial or quasi-judicial decision - makers: a hearing before a relatively (this being administrative law) impartial decision - maker who issues reasons explaining its decision.

Legislative choice to vest decision - making authority in these bodies, allied to their expertise, the complexity of the problems with which they deal and the ability of interested parties to participate in their proceedings justifies a deferential approach to judicial review of their decisions.

The problem is simply stated as follows: Develop a principled approach to reconcile traditional accounts of the rule of law with the modern reality that administrative agencies and statutory tribunals who do not operate like or resemble the ordinary courts but who nevertheless occupy a large amount of space in our legal system and can not avoid making legal determinations in exercising their statutory duties which often implicate individual rights and interests to a greater extent than judicial decisions.

To illustrate the problem with accusing judges of bias, given the term's various meanings, the article focuses on recent federal litigation over NYC police stop - and - frisk policy in which (1) the district judge found «implicit bias» in police practices based on accumulated evidence and expert analysis, (2) the Second Circuit found that the district judge engaged in disqualifying judicial bias because of her comments in a prior related lawsuit and in the media, and (3) critics accused the Second Circuit of bias in making decisions that were hard to justify on either procedural or substantive grounds.

With the decision to penalise made by the Judicial Department of the Shandong province, Zhu has become the first ever lawyer to be forcefully stripped of his practising licence by administrative measure, not as a result of any professional misconduct but of exercising his civil right of expression.

From this work I had learned that Canadian judges at all levels of courts are largely unfamiliar with what happens once sentence is imposed; indeed, I usually found myself quite disappointed with some of the myths and urban legends that too often inform judicial decision - making.

JY - In recent decades it has become quite clear that judicial elections can be ugly affairs with lots of negative campaigning - doesn't this hurt the judiciary's image - making people see them less as esteemed decision makers and more as politicians in robes?

Judicial Tribunal for the Dubai Courts and DIFC Courts awards Dubai Courts jurisdiction in «conduit» cases: The Judicial Tribunal for the Dubai Courts and the DIFC Courts, established in 2016 to rule on conflicts of jurisdiction and conflicts of judgments between the two courts, has issued two recent decisions in cases where claimants obtained an order from the DIFC Courts recognising arbitral awards made outside the DIFC, where there was no connection with the DIFC, and where the order recognising the award was referred for enforcement to the Dubai courts for enforcement against assets located there.

You can apply for judicial review only if you have been through the public body's own complaints and appeal procedures and are still unhappy with the decision made.

«She said employing a retired judge to blog the courts represented a «historic shift away from traditional judicial reluctance to explain or defend judicial decisions that are made in accordance with the rule of law».»

The function of absolute immunity in the performance of judicial duties is not to shield members of the judiciary from liability for their own misconduct, but rather «to protect their offices from the deterrent effect of suit alleging improper motives where there has been no more than a mistake or a disagreement on the part of the complaining party with the decision made.»

The conservative view may favour robust judicial review of decisions made by the executive branch, but perhaps not in some areas, such as those that have to do with national security.

Judges are discouraged from overburdening the law student with research at the expense of a full exposure to judicial decision - making.

[2] Cojocaru v. British Columbia Women's Hospital and Health Centre, 2013 SCC 30 at para. 33 (emphasis added)(see also, See also, Crowne - Mohammed, Emir, «The Copyright Issues Associated with Judicial Decision - Making (or, Hold on to Your Briefs: Are Judges Required to Cite Material Written by Lawyers?)

See Birte Englich, Thomas Mussweiler and Fritz Strack, «Playing Dice with Criminal Sentences: The Influence of Irrelevant Anchors on Experts» Judicial Decision Making» (2006) 32 Personality and Sociology Bulletin 188, which can be found here:

[47]... In judicial review, reasonableness is concerned mostly with the existence of justification, transparency and intelligibility within the decision - making process.

Furthermore, the Court of Appeal's decision makes salient determinations with regard to the amount of deference owed to the Property Assessment Appeal Board (the «Board») on judicial review, and the Board's exclusive jurisdiction over factual findings.

In our view, the statements made by Justice Camp during the trial and in his decision, the values implicit in those statements and the way in which he conducted himself are so antithetical to the contemporary values of our judicial system with respect to the manner in which complainants in sexual assault case should be treated that, in our view, confidence in the system can not be maintained unless the system disassociates itself from the image which the Judge, by his statements and approach, represents in the mind of a reasonable member of the public.

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, they found that neither the formalists nor the realists got it right with respect to judicial decision - making, the truth lying somewhere between intuition and deliberation; and they propose a way of helping judges move away from intuition where it leads to error.

Judicial Oversight Over the Interstate Placement of Foster Children: The Missing Element in Current Efforts to Reform the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (PDF - 301 KB) Sankaran (2009) Capital University Law Review, 38 Examines the role juvenile court judges play in making placement decisions for foster children, the need for judicial oversight in ICPC placements, and how to incorporate more oversight without interfering with the sovereignty ofJudicial Oversight Over the Interstate Placement of Foster Children: The Missing Element in Current Efforts to Reform the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (PDF - 301 KB) Sankaran (2009) Capital University Law Review, 38 Examines the role juvenile court judges play in making placement decisions for foster children, the need for judicial oversight in ICPC placements, and how to incorporate more oversight without interfering with the sovereignty ofjudicial oversight in ICPC placements, and how to incorporate more oversight without interfering with the sovereignty of States.

What most indigenous peoples pursue is especially «cultural» self - determination, which has been defined as «the right to recapture their identity, to reinvigorate their ways of life, to reconnect with the Earth, to regain their traditional lands, to protect their heritage, to revitalize their languages and manifest their culture — all of these rights are as important to indigenous people as the right to make final decisions in their internal political, judicial, and economic settings».