Sentences with phrase «judicial remedies in»

In the literature, scholars have thus concluded that the setting of judicial remedies in the EEA is incomplete for the EFTA countries, as there is no binding preliminary reference procedure which would ensure one unitary authoritative interpretation of EEA law (see S. Magnússon, «On the Authority of Advisory Opinions», 13 Europarättslig tidskrift (2010) p. 528 at p. 535 - 536).

Not exact matches

Among them are life, liberty, security of person, freedom from slavery and from torture and inhumane treatment; equality before the law; the right to judicial remedies for wrongs; freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention; fair trials and due process of law, including the presumption of innocence; privacy; freedom of movement; equal rights in marriage; freedoms of speech, press, assembly and association; and free elections.

Similarly, many schoolchildren today attend schools that lack sufficient and equitable funding in part because of Rodriguez, which foreclosed the federal judicial accountability that could require states to remedy their inequitable funding disparities.

Al Lindseth, an expert in school finance law and coauthor of «Schoolhouses, Courthouses, and Statehouses,» has sharply criticized these judicial remedies on the ground that they only throw money at broken systems.

Recent, more finely tuned data for New Jersey, provided by Peg Goertz, a University of Pennsylvania researcher who has closely followed developments in the Garden State, indicate that from 1999 to 2007 substantial gains were made in the Abbott districts, which were the focus of the judicial remedies.

If the Contracting Officer notifies the Contractor in writing that a strike or picketing: (a) is directed at the Contractor or subcontractor or any employee of either; and (b) impedes or threatens to impede access by any person to a DOT facility where the site of the work is located, the Contractor shall take all appropriate action to end such strike or picketing, including, if necessary, the filing of a charge of unfair labor practice with the National Labor Relations Board or the use of other available judicial or administrative remedies.

Hamilton essentially says that climate change, guaranteeing thousands of years of disruption in Earth systems, is a crime on a scale with no possible remedy in existing judicial or penal institutions:

The declaration should also guarantee procedural rights of peoples and communities, in particular access to environmental information, public participation in decision making and access to judicial remedies, in order to enable citizens and communities to play an active role in protecting their health and environment from air pollution.

Public participation (described as access to information and judicial remedy, as well as participation in decision making) in development projects not only has legal precedent in international accords but also has been incorporated into the procedures of international lending organizations.

Moreover, it is apparent from the case - law -LSB-...] that the legislation indicated «that property not belonging to private persons shall be administered and alienated according to the specific rules applicable to them; that, in respect of property belonging to public entities, even those pursuing industrial and commercial activities, the principle of non-seizability of that property precludes recourse to private - law enforcement remedies; that only the creditor who has obtained an enforceable favourable judicial decision having acquired the force of res judicata and ordering a public entity to pay, even provisionally, an amount of money, may have enforced the specific rules [applicable].

The Court's contention that EU law provides for a complete system of remedies, or at least remedies «sufficient to ensure effective judicial protection for individual parties in the fields covered by EU law» (Case C - 64 / 16, para. 34) has to be understood as a formalistic conception in the sense that BITs clearly provide more complete and effective remedies to investors than EU law or domestic law — and this understanding has been at the heart of the reasoning of arbitral tribunals in cases where they have rejected the argument that intra-EU BITs are incompatible with EU law.

This abstract idea is complemented by the more practical concern about the «full effectiveness of EU law» (para. 56), a central part of which is the availability of «remedies sufficient to ensure effective judicial protection for individual parties in the fields covered by EU law».

This means that in case of EU measures the investor might prefer to resort to ISDS instead of EU judicial remedies.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a Alaska injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

In broad terms, a tort is a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract, for which the judicial system or court is used to provide a remedy in the form of a required action for damageIn broad terms, a tort is a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract, for which the judicial system or court is used to provide a remedy in the form of a required action for damagein the form of a required action for damages.

The objective of a stay as a remedy is to maintain public confidence in both the legal and the judicial process.

On the bright side, the Court safeguards the right to effective remedies of irregular migrants against procedural abuses by the administrative and judicial authorities in three respects.

The argument (mentioned in columns by Profs Benykhlef and Vermeys in their Slaw ODR columns t00) is that there is no seriously available judicial remedy, so waiving one's «rights» to such a remedy is no serious sacrifice, and one may get from that act a usable ODR system.

This because it considered that the Implementing Regulation was a regulatory act (within the meaning of Inuit I), and that it did not entail implementing measures (the Commission holds that this condition is a test as to whether «the lowest act in the hierarchy of norms is challenged» — a question of judicial economy and the organisation of judicial remedies).

Part Four of the Bill contains proposals to make significant changes to judicial review by restricting the powers of the court to provide a remedy in certain types of challenges, and by imposing higher financial risks on claimants and interveners.

In their submissions on this motion, the carriers appear to be under the mistaken impression that an appeal is available on errors of fact or that this is a judicial review proceeding where the remedy for an omission to make a relevant finding of fact would be to remit the case back to the trier of fact.

Again, Anisminic is sometimes taken as authority for the proposition that unlawful administrative decisions are nullities, that they never existed in the eyes of the law, with the corollary that judges should not have any discretion to refuse judicial review remedies.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a Georgia injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

And so it could hedge its bets and formulate the norm as prohibiting Member States «to remove from the jurisdiction of their own courts, and hence from the system of judicial remedies which the second subparagraph of Article 19 (1) TEU requires them to establish in the fields covered by EU law, disputes which may concern the application or interpretation of EU law.»

agree to remove from the jurisdiction of their own courts, and hence from the system of judicial remedies which the second subparagraph of Article 19 (1) TEU requires them to establish in the fields covered by EU law (see, to that effect, judgment of 27 February 2018, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses, C ‑ 64 / 16, EU: C: 2018:117, paragraph 34), disputes which may concern the application or interpretation of EU law.

If the procedural exclusivity issue is to take firm root then it will matter; time limits in judicial review are tight and the scope for judicial remedies narrow, whereas the ills of the child support scheme for all concerned with it are many and varied.

In the 1970s Carwells and Maritime Law Book commenced a number of provincial and topical reporters that remedied in part the lack of availability of judicial decisionIn the 1970s Carwells and Maritime Law Book commenced a number of provincial and topical reporters that remedied in part the lack of availability of judicial decisionin part the lack of availability of judicial decisions.

To prevent the judicial system from taking a role in setting educational spending priorities and remedies that could badly tilt educational priorities, the Province and the School Board asked the British Columbia Supreme Court for a judicial review of the Tribunal's decision or alternatively, to quash the remedial orders made by the Tribunal.

The Court's decision in Strickland, referenced in more detail in this blog post, speaks to the circumstances in which a federal court can decline to exercise its jurisdiction to grant judicial review remedies.

To the extent that a student wishes to seek a remedy, that remedy would lie in the university's internal appeal mechanism and / or with the court on judicial review.

Furthermore, although it is true that the procedure laid down in Article 267 TFEU is an instrument for cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts, by means of which the former provides the latter with the points of interpretation of EU law necessary in order for them to decide the disputes before them, the fact remains that when there is no judicial remedy under national law against the decision of a court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal is, in principle, obliged to bring the matter before the Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the interpretation of EU law is raised before it...

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a Tennessee injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a Missouri injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a California injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

remedy for this, however, lies, not in the abuse by the judicial authority of its functions, but in the people, upon whom, after all, under our institutions, reliance must be placed for the correction of abuses committed in the exercise of a lawful power.»

A. 20 In effect, this means that whilst decisions of the DSB create an obligation on the part of the losing party to comply with WTO rules, enforcement can be achieved by various means — including amicable settlement, compensation, or the suspension of trade concessions.101 Indeed, it was for this reason that the CJEU found in the case of Portugal v Council that a DSB decision did not oblige the losing party to achieve full implementation of its recommendations, where the possibility of temporary compensation or retaliatory measures remained available.102 In other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial bodIn effect, this means that whilst decisions of the DSB create an obligation on the part of the losing party to comply with WTO rules, enforcement can be achieved by various means — including amicable settlement, compensation, or the suspension of trade concessions.101 Indeed, it was for this reason that the CJEU found in the case of Portugal v Council that a DSB decision did not oblige the losing party to achieve full implementation of its recommendations, where the possibility of temporary compensation or retaliatory measures remained available.102 In other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial bodin the case of Portugal v Council that a DSB decision did not oblige the losing party to achieve full implementation of its recommendations, where the possibility of temporary compensation or retaliatory measures remained available.102 In other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial bodIn other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial body.

Also, to enjoy the equal benefit and protection of human rights guarantees, persons with disabilities must be able to seek remedies in an appropriate forum, which could include the administrative or judicial system.

Tim has appeared in all levels of court in British Columbia, and the Federal Court of Canada, including in trials, summary trial proceedings, injunction applications, interlocutory applications, oppressive remedy proceedings, judicial review petitions, and appellant hearings.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a North Carolina injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.

At what may, without belittling the victim, be called the lower end of the scale where injury happens through the negligence of non-state agents, the state's provision of a judicial system of civil remedies will often suffice: the individual state's legal traditions will govern the means of compliance in the particular case.

In this specific area, which is the compensation of personal injury cases, theoretical knowledge is indispensable, and it requires the mastery of technical questions such as the methods of forensic and pecuniary evaluation of a personal injury, the processes of compensation (procedures and judicial remedies), and third - party redress.

Where any such question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court of Justice.

(a) any court or tribunal of that State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law may request the Court of Justice to give a preliminary ruling on a question raised in a case pending before it and concerning the validity or interpretation of an act referred to in paragraph 1 if that court or tribunal considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to give judgment; or

by appellant as a part of the latter constitutional contention disappears by our holding, as indicated later in this opinion, that the challenged clause of the ordinance and New Hampshire's requirement for following a judicial remedy for the arbitrary refusal are valid.

judicial review your remedy is to apply to a court and / or write your representative (s) in legislature.

Address to the Joint OFL / ONIWG Conference focuses on major problems in Ontario's system: experience rating; OH&S inspection; role of doctors, objective medical evidence and statistics in legal decisionmaking; actuaries; claims procedures — and whether judicial review, Charter are effective legal remedies.

The report noted this review could be administered either by a statutory appeal provision in the tribunal's governing legislation or via the inherent jurisdiction of a superior court to engage in judicial review, but the report advocated more strongly for the statutory appeal over judicial review because: (1) the basis of the statutory appeal could be wider in scope and in remedies than judicial review; (2) the statutory appeal mechanism could be crafted to the unique characteristics of the impugned tribunal and direct the appeal to a particular level of court; and (3) the appeal would be less costly and more expeditious than judicial review.

We emphasize that this does not deprive the judge of a remedy where procedural or fairness issues arise in an inquiry, just that the sui generis judicial conduct process under the Judges Act has built into it a mechanism (by way of appeal from the Committee to the Council at the end of the inquiry process) to address those issues through the Council which is itself a superior court.

Likewise, the Court observes that legislation not providing for any possibility for an individual to pursue legal remedies in order to have access to personal data relating to him, or to obtain the rectification or erasure of such data, compromises the essence of the fundamental right to effective judicial protection, the existence of such a possibility being inherent in the existence of the rule of law.

The following factors are considered in determining recognition and enforceability of a foreign injunction: (a) are the terms of the order clear and specific enough to ensure that the defendant will know what is expected; (b) is the order limited in its scope and did the originating court retain the power to issue further orders; (c) is the enforcement the least burdensome remedy for the Canadian justice system; (d) is the Canadian litigant exposed to unforeseen obligations; (e) are any third parties affected by the order; and (f) will the use of judicial resources be consistent with what would be allowed for domestic litigants.