Sentences with phrase «liability disputes at»

Our lawyers have extensive experience litigating coverage and liability disputes at trial and on appeal, in the British Columbia and Federal court systems, including the Supreme Court of Canada.

Not exact matches

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such forward - looking statements and that should be considered in evaluating our outlook include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) our ability to continue to grow our business and execute our growth strategy, including the timing, execution, and profitability of new and maturing programs; 2) our ability to perform our obligations under our new and maturing commercial, business aircraft, and military development programs, and the related recurring production; 3) our ability to accurately estimate and manage performance, cost, and revenue under our contracts, including our ability to achieve certain cost reductions with respect to the B787 program; 4) margin pressures and the potential for additional forward losses on new and maturing programs; 5) our ability to accommodate, and the cost of accommodating, announced increases in the build rates of certain aircraft; 6) the effect on aircraft demand and build rates of changing customer preferences for business aircraft, including the effect of global economic conditions on the business aircraft market and expanding conflicts or political unrest in the Middle East or Asia; 7) customer cancellations or deferrals as a result of global economic uncertainty or otherwise; 8) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which we operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; 9) the success and timely execution of key milestones such as the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals, including our ability to obtain in a timely fashion any required regulatory or other third party approvals for the consummation of our announced acquisition of Asco, and customer adherence to their announced schedules; 10) our ability to successfully negotiate, or re-negotiate, future pricing under our supply agreements with Boeing and our other customers; 11) our ability to enter into profitable supply arrangements with additional customers; 12) the ability of all parties to satisfy their performance requirements under existing supply contracts with our two major customers, Boeing and Airbus, and other customers, and the risk of nonpayment by such customers; 13) any adverse impact on Boeing's and Airbus» production of aircraft resulting from cancellations, deferrals, or reduced orders by their customers or from labor disputes, domestic or international hostilities, or acts of terrorism; 14) any adverse impact on the demand for air travel or our operations from the outbreak of diseases or epidemic or pandemic outbreaks; 15) our ability to avoid or recover from cyber-based or other security attacks, information technology failures, or other disruptions; 16) returns on pension plan assets and the impact of future discount rate changes on pension obligations; 17) our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance debt, including our ability to obtain the debt to finance the purchase price for our announced acquisition of Asco on favorable terms or at all; 18) competition from commercial aerospace original equipment manufacturers and other aerostructures suppliers; 19) the effect of governmental laws, such as U.S. export control laws and U.S. and foreign anti-bribery laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the United Kingdom Bribery Act, and environmental laws and agency regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad; 20) the effect of changes in tax law, such as the effect of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the «TCJA») that was enacted on December 22, 2017, and changes to the interpretations of or guidance related thereto, and the Company's ability to accurately calculate and estimate the effect of such changes; 21) any reduction in our credit ratings; 22) our dependence on our suppliers, as well as the cost and availability of raw materials and purchased components; 23) our ability to recruit and retain a critical mass of highly - skilled employees and our relationships with the unions representing many of our employees; 24) spending by the U.S. and other governments on defense; 25) the possibility that our cash flows and our credit facility may not be adequate for our additional capital needs or for payment of interest on, and principal of, our indebtedness; 26) our exposure under our revolving credit facility to higher interest payments should interest rates increase substantially; 27) the effectiveness of any interest rate hedging programs; 28) the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting; 29) the outcome or impact of ongoing or future litigation, claims, and regulatory actions; 30) exposure to potential product liability and warranty claims; 31) our ability to effectively assess, manage and integrate acquisitions that we pursue, including our ability to successfully integrate the Asco business and generate synergies and other cost savings; 32) our ability to consummate our announced acquisition of Asco in a timely matter while avoiding any unexpected costs, charges, expenses, adverse changes to business relationships and other business disruptions for ourselves and Asco as a result of the acquisition; 33) our ability to continue selling certain receivables through our supplier financing program; 34) the risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign current exchange rates, impositions of tariffs or embargoes, compliance with foreign laws, and domestic and foreign government policies; and 35) our ability to complete the proposed accelerated stock repurchase plan, among other things.

Such risks, uncertainties and other factors include, without limitation: (1) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including financial market conditions, fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates, levels of end market demand in construction and in both the commercial and defense segments of the aerospace industry, levels of air travel, financial condition of commercial airlines, the impact of weather conditions and natural disasters and the financial condition of our customers and suppliers; (2) challenges in the development, production, delivery, support, performance and realization of the anticipated benefits of advanced technologies and new products and services; (3) the scope, nature, impact or timing of acquisition and divestiture or restructuring activity, including the pending acquisition of Rockwell Collins, including among other things integration of acquired businesses into United Technologies» existing businesses and realization of synergies and opportunities for growth and innovation; (4) future timing and levels of indebtedness, including indebtedness expected to be incurred by United Technologies in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition, and capital spending and research and development spending, including in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition; (5) future availability of credit and factors that may affect such availability, including credit market conditions and our capital structure; (6) the timing and scope of future repurchases of United Technologies» common stock, which may be suspended at any time due to various factors, including market conditions and the level of other investing activities and uses of cash, including in connection with the proposed acquisition of Rockwell; (7) delays and disruption in delivery of materials and services from suppliers; (8) company and customer - directed cost reduction efforts and restructuring costs and savings and other consequences thereof; (9) new business and investment opportunities; (10) our ability to realize the intended benefits of organizational changes; (11) the anticipated benefits of diversification and balance of operations across product lines, regions and industries; (12) the outcome of legal proceedings, investigations and other contingencies; (13) pension plan assumptions and future contributions; (14) the impact of the negotiation of collective bargaining agreements and labor disputes; (15) the effect of changes in political conditions in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate, including the effect of changes in U.S. trade policies or the U.K.'s pending withdrawal from the EU, on general market conditions, global trade policies and currency exchange rates in the near term and beyond; (16) the effect of changes in tax (including U.S. tax reform enacted on December 22, 2017, which is commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017), environmental, regulatory (including among other things import / export) and other laws and regulations in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate; (17) the ability of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins to receive the required regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the merger) and to satisfy the other conditions to the closing of the pending acquisition on a timely basis or at all; (18) the occurrence of events that may give rise to a right of one or both of United Technologies or Rockwell Collins to terminate the merger agreement, including in circumstances that might require Rockwell Collins to pay a termination fee of $ 695 million to United Technologies or $ 50 million of expense reimbursement; (19) negative effects of the announcement or the completion of the merger on the market price of United Technologies» and / or Rockwell Collins» common stock and / or on their respective financial performance; (20) risks related to Rockwell Collins and United Technologies being restricted in their operation of their businesses while the merger agreement is in effect; (21) risks relating to the value of the United Technologies» shares to be issued in connection with the pending Rockwell acquisition, significant merger costs and / or unknown liabilities; (22) risks associated with third party contracts containing consent and / or other provisions that may be triggered by the Rockwell merger agreement; (23) risks associated with merger - related litigation or appraisal proceedings; and (24) the ability of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins, or the combined company, to retain and hire key personnel.

As Businessweek writes, «Tech giants and other corporations that have grown by serial acquisition fear the Actelion precedent could expose them — at least in California — to open - ended liability over licensing disputes involving the smaller new - technology companies they are wont to gobble up like so many cocktail nuts.»

Tech giants and other corporations that have grown by serial acquisition fear the Actelion precedent could expose them — at least in California — to open - ended liability over licensing disputes involving the smaller new - technology companies they are wont to gobble up like so many cocktail nuts.

One of the unique strengths of credit cards is that you're legally entitled to withhold payment of disputed charges on your statement during an investigation, and your liability for unauthorized ones is capped at $ 50, according to the Federal Trade Commission.

I have succeeded at trial in all cases that have not settled on liability disputes including acting for clients who were motorcyclists and pedestrians.

At the Lynn Law Firm, he brings this broad experience and unique strategic perspective to represent clients in personal injury, insurance coverage, products liability, contract disputes, antitrust / intellectual property, and other civil litigation matters.

At Breslin & Breslin, our experienced trial lawyers combine a thorough understanding of premises liability law with substantial experience in proving disputed facts concerning the condition of the property, the cause of the accident and the extent of the victim's damages.

liability may be in dispute such as, for example, an accident in a parking lot, or at an unmarked intersection

Prior to joining Theall Group LLP, Camille summered and articled at the Toronto office of a prominent national business law firm, gaining commercial litigation experience in class proceedings, injunctions, franchise disputes, professional liability, employment law, municipal liability and negligence / product liability.

At Conroy Simberg, our premises liability team concentrates on using direct negotiation and alternative dispute resolution methods, including mediation and arbitration, to close our clients» cases efficiently and economically.

Our client was involved in a disputed liability motor vehicle accident occurring at an intersection in McDonough County, Illinois.

Pilar is fluent in English and is a regular speaker at seminars to national and international insurance companies on topics including product liability claims, engineering clauses, alternative dispute resolution methods, professional indemnity and the Spanish Insurance Contract Act.

In 2016, Jon received the 20th highest personal injury trial verdict in California, a $ 3,652,000 verdict for a disputed liability vehicle collision at an intersection.

Mr. Fulmer was a partner at Rissman, Barrett and practiced in multi-line insurance defense including medical malpractice, products, premises liability, auto and third - party insurance disputes.

Mr. Chang regularly advises clients concerning investment disputes and also has extensive experience representing clients in U.S. courts at the trial and appellate levels in connection with securities fraud, complex commercial and professional liability litigations.

The Defendants disputed liability but she pursued the claim on behalf of her client through a 5 day trial at which he was successful and subsequently recovered substantial compensation for his losses.

(4) If a person who would be entitled to benefits under this Regulation in the absence of subsection (1) elects to bring an action referred to in section 30 of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 and there is a dispute concerning the insurer's liability to pay an expense for a vocational rehabilitation program the person was attending at the time of the election and continues to attend, the insurer shall pay the expense pending resolution of the dispute.

We have an expertise and regularly appear in cases involving rights and liabilities under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, and we are as at home rolling our sleeves up to deal with complex factual disputes in the FTT as we are in higher Courts and Tribunals.

Personal Injury Car Accidents Truck Accidents Wrongful Death Motorcycle Accidents Dog Bites / Attacks Bicycle Accidents Child Injury — Day Care Injury — School Accidents — Sex Abuse — Clergy Abuse — Foster Home / DSHS Slip and Fall / Trip and Fall Workplace Injuries Pedestrian and Crosswalk Nursing Home Injuries Construction accidents Drunk Driving Accidents Medical Malpractice Maritime Accidents / Injuries At Sea Products Liability Negligence Insurance Claims Insurance Bad Faith Unpaid Wages Disability Insurance Disputes Sexual Harassment Employment Discrimination Age Discrimination Premises Liability / Store & Department Stores

Although many product liability claims are eventually settled, the corporations and their insurance companies fight vigorously any claim disputes, requiring that the law firm going against them puts forth at least as much force and use of resources to establish their negligence.

In a disputed liability case, the testimony of a lay witness can be helpful to the plaintiff in proving who was at fault for the accident.

In a car accident case — especially in cases where an insurance company is disputing liability (or fault)-- lay witnesses can testify about the speeds and directions of vehicles, temperature and weather conditions at the scene, traffic conditions at the scene, lane markings, visibility conditions, observations made at the scene, statements that were made by either the plaintiff or the defendant at the scene, and the presence (or absence) of traffic control devices at the scene, such as traffic lights or stop signs.

According to courtstatistics.org, median costs for a business lawsuit start at $ 54,000 for a liability suit, and can reach around $ 91,000 for the median contract dispute.

James J. Noonan is a partner at the firm practicing primarily in the areas of personal injury and insurance defense and particularly on construction litigation, insurance coverage disputes, motor vehicle, premises liability, and uninsured / under - insured motorist cases.

Liability was disputed but the Court found the Defendant fully at fault for the collision.

DWF attracts praise for providing advice that is «always of the highest standard; the practice always comes up with a plan to resolve the claim at the earliest possible time when liability is not in dispute and where it is in dispute, it provides a thoughtful and creative plan to prepare the file for trial».

Peter has practised Civil Litigation at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP for over forty - one years, specializing in resolving insurance, commercial and construction disputes of various categories, including coverage issues; commercial, property, professional and other liability policies; product liability; class actions; and construction law.

Kenneth Stallard is a Member at Carr Maloney with over 25 years of experience in civil litigation, including professional malpractice, construction defects, fire loss, medical devices, products liability, lead paint exposure, radon gas exposure, insurance coverage, contract disputes, and trust and estates matters.

Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Basaria was a civil litigation attorney at a national law firm where she represented clients in a variety of matters, including commercial litigation, construction litigation, professional liability, land use / zoning litigation, and employment disputes and counseling.

Product Liability Defense: At The Center of The Storm — The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel — Fall 2007 [Commercial Disputes Observer]; November 7, 2007.

The crash occurred at an intersection and both liability (fault) and quantum (value of injuries) were in dispute at trial.

Initially, the at - fault driver's insurance company denied the man's claim due to a dispute in liability; however, due to tenacious representation and aggressive negotiations, attorneys with Staver Law Group obtained a settlement for the policy limit of 25,000, due to the injuries and constant pain and discomfort the client suffered following the collision.

This was, furthermore, the approach of the CJEU in Case C - 352 / 13 CDC v Akzo [2015] QB 906, in which it was held that a clause ``... which abstractly refers to all disputes arising from contractual relationships» would not cover tortious liability as a result of a cartel, because ``... the undertaking which suffered the loss could not reasonably foresee such litigation at the time that it agreed to the jurisdiction clause» (paras 69 - 70).

Peter has successfully litigated numerous product liability, personal injury, property and subrogation claims, and has appeared at various levels of the Ontario court system, before administrative and regulatory bodies, and in Alternative Dispute Resolution forums.

Douglas F. Cutbush frequently speaks at seminars and conferences dealing with such subjects as Claims Management, Business Interruption, Excess Liability Claims, Builders Risk Policies, Coverage Disputes, Reinsurance Claims, Arbitration, Mediation and Appraisals under the Insurance Act.

He also has assisted clients in resolving disputes in areas such as construction, product liability, contracts, real estate, employment, and business matters at both the local and national level.

At Elkus & Sisson, P.C., Zach Wagner's practice has focused primarily in complex civil litigation, involving real estate disputes, employment law, contract disputes, personal injury, medical malpractice, wrongful death, constitutional law, and products liability matters.

In setting out the justification for exercising the discretion in favour of Mrs A, Coulson J, said, «fundamental matters arise for consideration at the outset», namely, «the starting point for any consideration of this case must be the serious nature of the underlying tort; the absence of any dispute about liability simpliciter; and the consequences of that undisputed wrong on the claimant's ability to recover substantial damages from the defendant.»

Settlement conferences are mandatory in all BC court registries, except Robson Square in Vancouver, and except for motor vehicle accident cases in which liability is in dispute and a judge is asked to determine who is at fault and / or how much money to award the claimant, if any.

Levicom also argued that Linklaters had been negligent in failing to advise Levicom to obtain the advice of senior and experienced leading counsel on either the prospects of establishing liability or the likely recoverable quantum at an appropriately early stage of the dispute.