Sentences with phrase «limited by a court order»

Unless your rights are limited by a court order, you may direct your child's moral and religious training when the child is with you.

Not exact matches

The case being led by Texas and filed at the Federal Court in the Southern District of Texas said the executive order announced by Obama last month violated constitutional limits on presidential powers.

While Jesner suggests that five justices likely would rule that the federal courts should not recognize an ATS cause of action against American corporations for their overseas activities, several federal appeals courts have exhibited little willingness to limit the scope of ATS liability unless directly ordered to do so by the Supreme Court.

I do not yet know what all of Levin's proposed Liberty Amendments are — apparently, there is a new crack at Congressional term limits, which I am iffy about, an amendment for Supreme Court decisions to be expunged by 60 % of Congress or the States, which I am very iffy about, one providing Supreme Court term limits, which I am cool with, one requiring bureaucracy - ordered rule - changes to be subject to Congressional approval when they affect the economy by a certain amount, which I am also.

The Federal Court has ordered Woolworths Limited (Woolworths) to pay penalties totalling $ 9 million for contraventions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (now called the Competition and Consumer Act 2010)(the Act), following admissions made by Woolworths in proceedings brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

From time to time, we may use your Personal Information and Traffic Data: (a) if we need to respond to valid legal process, including, but not limited to, a search warrant, subpoena, or court order, and any other instance when we believe we are required to do so by law; or (b) if we deem it necessary to disclose Personal Information or Traffic Data, in our sole discretion, to comply with any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request, or to protect our rights or interests.

Secondly, if the father wants to register against the mother's wishes, the court, whilst it can not deny PR to any parent on child welfare grounds (as it currently prevented from doing so except for unmarried fathers), the court can use a Section 8 order to limit the exercise of PR by any parent on child welfare grounds.

Mrs. Jonathan added, «On May 3, 2017, officials of the FIRS, in a convoy of about 20 trucks and over 70 personnel, raided our client's NGO — Aridolf Jo Resort Wellness and Spa Limited — situated at Kpansia Expressway, Bayelsa State, and orchestrated a massive destruction of personal properties belonging to our client without any lawful court order or search warrant and caused mayhem there under the guise of trying to collect unpaid taxes without following any due process provided by law to do so.»

The ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), Network Broadcasting Limited and Zeze Media Operators of Montie FM on Thursday paid their fines as ordered by the Supreme Court.

The affidavit stated in part, «That the same Federal Government later went to Lagos and obtained another order made by Justice C.M.A. Olatoregun of the Federal High Court, Lagos Division on October 10, 2017 directing the managers of the Skye Bank, Ecobank Plc, Fidelity Bank Plc, Stanbic IBTC Plc, Zenith Bank Plc, and Diamond Bank Plc, to in the interim, freeze and attach the various sums of money in the accounts belonging to Dame Patience Jonathan, Finchley Top Homes Limited and Ariwabai Aruera Reachout Foundation.

The sweeping anti-busing legislation — approved by the Senate as part of a bill providing funds for the Justice Department this year — not only forbids the Justice Department from bringing desegregation suits that could result in busing and limits the power of federal courts to order busing for such purposes, but allows Justice Department officials to support the removal of court - ordered busing plans already in operation.

Except as required for use by the president in the discharge of his or her official responsibilities, the custodian of limited - access records may release information from such records only upon authorization in writing from the employee or upon order of a court of competent jurisdiction.

a) Disputes filed - 18 months b) Inquiries - 2 years c) Payment profile -5 years d) Information related to a consumers payment behavior such as slow payer, defaulted or absconded - 1 year e) Information relating to the action that a credit provider has taken against a consumer to enforce a debt such as handed over, legal action or write - off - 2 years f) Debt restructuring - Until a clearance certificate is given g) Civil court judgments - 5 years or until the court removes it h) Administration orders (orders to put a consumer under administration)- 10 years or until the court removes it i) Sequestrations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- 10 years or until the court removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Afcourt judgments - 5 years or until the court removes it h) Administration orders (orders to put a consumer under administration)- 10 years or until the court removes it i) Sequestrations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- 10 years or until the court removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Afcourt removes it h) Administration orders (orders to put a consumer under administration)- 10 years or until the court removes it i) Sequestrations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- 10 years or until the court removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Afcourt removes it i) Sequestrations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- 10 years or until the court removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Afcourt where the consumer is insolvent)- 10 years or until the court removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Afcourt removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Afcourt where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South AfCourt order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Africa.

To the extent permitted by law, we shall not be liable for any Losses by or with respect to the Account, except to the extent that such Losses are actual Losses proven with reasonable certainty, are not speculative, are proven to have been fairly within the contemplation of the parties as of the date hereof, and are determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or an arbitration panel in a final non-appealable judgment or order to have resulted solely from our gross negligence or willful misconduct and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, we will not be liable for any indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages or other losses (regardless of whether such damages or other losses were reasonably foreseeable).

The court may also make orders for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.

(2) «Sole custody» means a person, including, but not limited to, a parent who has temporary or permanent custody of a child and, unless otherwise provided for by court order, the rights and responsibilities for major decisions concerning the child, including the child's education, medical and dental care, extracurricular activities, and religious training.

Siding with the Fourth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits, the Supreme Court held a federal court exercising its inherent authority to sanction bad faith conduct by ordering a litigant to pay the other side's legal fees is limited to awarding the fees the innocent party incurred solely because of the misconduct or — put another way — to the fees that party would not have incurred but for the bad fCourt held a federal court exercising its inherent authority to sanction bad faith conduct by ordering a litigant to pay the other side's legal fees is limited to awarding the fees the innocent party incurred solely because of the misconduct or — put another way — to the fees that party would not have incurred but for the bad fcourt exercising its inherent authority to sanction bad faith conduct by ordering a litigant to pay the other side's legal fees is limited to awarding the fees the innocent party incurred solely because of the misconduct or — put another way — to the fees that party would not have incurred but for the bad faith.

The draft order seeks to reduce all fees payable in civil and family matters by 10 %; and limit the level of enhancements that can be paid to solicitors in civil and family cases at 100 % for cases heard in the Upper Tribunal High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court and 50 % for all other proceedings.

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 my view, in order to justify a Charter limit, the record of evidence considered by the line decision maker should demonstrate the elements of accountability, intelligibility, adequacy and transparency courts expect from administrative tribunals.

The policy at issue in this case, was crafted in such a way that in order to engage the insurer's duty to defend, it required the communication, during the policy period, by a third party, of an intention to hold the Jesuits responsible for damages.36 In this case, it was accepted by the parties, that if the claims were made within the temporal limits of the Policy, the duty to defend would have been engaged as the claims allege injuries that would fall within the policy.37 In fact the Court found one of the claims was made within the policy period and therefore did trigger the insurer's duty to defend.38 The rest of the claims however were found not to have been communicated during the policy period and, as a result, the insurer did not have a duty to defend the actions.39 The determination of whether a policy will be «claims - made» or «occurrence based» will depend on many factors.

The decision in Vinod Chopra Films Private Limited et al. v. John Doe 2010 FC 387 by Hughes, J. concerns a review of a «rolling» Anton Piller order granted by the Federal Court of Canada in a copyright infringement case to an Indian film production company and its Canadian licensee against various un-named persons who (according to the claim) «deal in counterfeit video recordings.»

For example, it might be possible to transfer assets into a family limited partnership that has both estate planning and asset protection benefits however, if moving such assets into a Family Limited Partnership or Trust is designed to remove the asset out of the marital estate in contemplation of divorce in order to defraud the soon to be ex-spouse, the transfer may be rescinded by the court as being a fraudulent convlimited partnership that has both estate planning and asset protection benefits however, if moving such assets into a Family Limited Partnership or Trust is designed to remove the asset out of the marital estate in contemplation of divorce in order to defraud the soon to be ex-spouse, the transfer may be rescinded by the court as being a fraudulent convLimited Partnership or Trust is designed to remove the asset out of the marital estate in contemplation of divorce in order to defraud the soon to be ex-spouse, the transfer may be rescinded by the court as being a fraudulent conveyance.

As the Supreme Court in Morguard emphasized, however, the Act does not in any way limit the far larger application of comity in regard to orders and judgments not covered by the Act (i.e. non-money judgments or foreign judgments other than those select U.S. states).

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.

Recently, the grant of a Norwich Pharmacal order came under close examination by the Supreme Court in The Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Limited (formerly Viagogo Limited)(In Liquidation)[2012] UKSC 55, [2012] All ER (D) 236 (Nov), which considered the facts of the case and balanced case law against the right to protection of personal data guaranteed by Art 8 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Justice Brown found that the whether or not the court should exercise its discretion to hear a moot appeal, is guided by the following test: (i) whether the issues can be well and fully argued by parties who have a stake in the outcome; (ii) the concern for judicial economy; and (iii) the need for the court to remain alive to the proper limits of its law - making function in order to avoid intrusions into the role of the legislative branch.

Pursuant to an Order of the Supreme Court of Washington, lawyers, limited practice officers, and limited license legal technicians may only hold IOLTA deposits in financial institutions that have been certified as eligible by the Legal Foundation of Washington.

This applies both where that advice is limited in time, eg until after a criminal defence statement has been filed and served and, worse still, the advice is given not to make such a response at all; • (f) the date on which a party to care proceedings is to file and serve a criminal defence statement in linked criminal proceedings is wholly irrelevant to the court's determination of the date on which that party should file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement in the care proceedings; • (g) the mere fact that a party is ordered to file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement before the date a criminal defence statement is to be filed and served in criminal proceedings is not a ground for failing to comply with the former order; • (h) it [is not] a ground for an application to extend the time for compliance with an order to file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement until a date after the criminal defence statement has been filed and served; and • (i) any issue about alleged prejudice to a defendant in criminal proceedings based on him being required to file and serve a response to threshold and / or to file and serve a narrative statement before the date of a criminal defence statement is to be filed and served, or at all, only arises and is only potentially relevant if and when an application is made by the police and / or a co-accused for statements and documents filed in the family proceedings to be disclosed into linked criminal proceedings [see Re C (A Minor)(Care Proceedings: Disclosure)[1997] Fam 76, [1997] 2 WLR 322, sub nom Re EC (Disclosure of Material)[1996] 2 FLR 725, CA].

Interestingly, it's not clear what the appellate order means since the court of appeals agreed with the prosecution that «Mr. Stern's new trial motion could not be granted... [b] ut... what can occur to Mr. Stern once the remittur issues is limited by the double jeopardy provisions of our Constitutions.»

Parenting coordination provides an alternative dispute resolution process whereby an impartial third person called a parenting coordinator assists the parties in developing or implementing their parenting plan by facilitating the resolution of disputes in high conflict cases, providing education and making recommendations to the parties, and, with the prior consent of the parties and approval of the court, making limited decisions within the scope of the order of referral.

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.

Any amount claimed by a party in excess of the $ 25,000 limit would have to be abandoned by such party in order to continue to proceed with an action in Small Claims Court.

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.

Permits the judicial emergency order to suspend, toll, extend, or otherwise grant relief from time limits or filing requirements in any court affected by the order and allows designation of a neighboring jurisdiction as proper venue for civil and criminal proceedings.

The question is: do the documents in dispute, ie, MSP and Pharmanet, come withing the terms of either Rule 7 - 1 (1)(a), ie, documents that can be used by a party of record to prove or disprove a material fact or that will be referred to at trial or, if not, do they come under category 7 - 1 (11), generally, in the vernacular, referred to as the Guano documents... There is no question that there is a higher duty on a party requesting documents under the second category... that in addition to requesting, they must explain and satisfy either the party being demanded or the court, if an order is sought, with an explanation «with reasonable specificity that indicates the reason why such additional documents or classes of documents should be disclosed», and again, there is no doubt that the new Rules have limited the obligation for production in the first instance to the first category that I have described and has reduced or lessened the obligation for production in general...

Instead the Court relies on the wording of a Practice Direction, namely FPR 2010 PD12D which states that, «the court may in exercising its inherent jurisdiction make any order or determine any issue in respect of a child unless limited by case law or statute.&rCourt relies on the wording of a Practice Direction, namely FPR 2010 PD12D which states that, «the court may in exercising its inherent jurisdiction make any order or determine any issue in respect of a child unless limited by case law or statute.&rcourt may in exercising its inherent jurisdiction make any order or determine any issue in respect of a child unless limited by case law or statute.»

Chapter 1: Expanding Your Practice by Representing Clients in Mediation Chapter 2: Family Lawyer as Dispute Resolution Manager Chapter 3: Mediation Confidentiality Chapter 4: Representing Clients in Court - Ordered Mediation Chapter 5: Using a Limited Scope Approach (Unbundling) to Represent Clients Outside and Inside the Mediation Room Chapter 6: Representing Clients in Mediation with a Collaborative Lawyering Approach Chapter 7: Setting Up the Mediation Chapter 8: Building an Agreement Your Client Can Live With Chapter 9: Reaching Agreement Chapter 10: Reviewing and Drafting Mediated Agreements Chapter 11: Preventing Future Conflict Chapter 12: Be a Peacemaker

On basis of limited admissions made by father, the Court were content not to proceed with fact finding hearing The Court Ordered parental responsibility to the father and direct contact once father had engaged onto the Living Without Violence Programme.

But in addition to relying on Bio-Rad's waiver, late filing, and ignoring its order, the court found that California law on privileged and protected attorney - client material is preempted by Sarbanes - Oxley to the extent California imposes stricter limits than SOX.

I acknowledge and agree that violation of this Employee Confidential Information and Invention Assignment Agreement by me may cause the Company irreparable harm, and therefore I agree that the Company will be entitled to seek extraordinary relief in court, including, but not limited to, temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions and permanent injunctions without the necessity of posting a bond or other security (or, where such a bond or security is required, I agree that a $ [NUMBER] bond will be adequate), in addition to and without prejudice to any other rights or remedies that the Company may have for a breach of this Employee Confidential Information and Invention Assignment Agreement.

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.

Limiting or denying the rights of the other parent is frowned upon by the courts, and should not be done without a court order.

One of the enhanced powers under Rule 20.04 (2.2) is that the Court may order that oral evidence be presented by one of more parties, with or without time limits on its presentation, in order to weigh the evidence, evaluate credibility of a deponent or draw a reasonable inference from the evidence.

The Alabama Supreme Court held that it could not consider the constitutional issues underlying the contempt judgment which related to the power of the State to order production of membership lists because review by certiorari was limited to instances

While Jesner suggests that five justices likely would rule that the federal courts should not recognize an ATS cause of action against American corporations for their overseas activities, several federal appeals courts have exhibited little willingness to limit the scope of ATS liability unless directly ordered to do so by the Supreme Court.

Nonpublic information may include, but is not limited to, information that is sealed by statute or court order or impounded or communicated in camera, and information offered in grand jury proceedings, presentencing reports, dependency cases, or psychiatric reports.

It is important for judges to take control of alienation cases, to limit the possibility of manipulating the court process by the parents, and to ensure a firm and quick response to violations of court orders.

Section 5 contains examples of the types of provisions that a serious crime prevention order might include, but does not limit the flexibility of the court, provided for by s 1 (3), to impose such provisions as it thinks appropriate for the purposes of protecting the public by preventing, restricting or disrupting the subject's involvement in serious crime.