Sentences with phrase «live appeal of a decision»

A final confrontation between Blaine Amendments and the First Amendment will require a live appeal of a decision that strikes down a voucher program by invoking a Blaine Amendment.

Not exact matches

The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a decision that a lawyer must personally pay the legal costs of a hospital and a doctor involved in a legal battle with her, over her attempt to remove a client from life support, saying she was «intent on achieving her own personal objective.»

Republican state Rep. Mitch Gillespie, who sponsored the bill for the «Choose Life» plates, said he would push for an appeal of the judge's decision, CNN affiliate WRAL reported.

Overturning a lower court's decision that ruled that the laws unconstitutionally limited access to abortion in the state, New Orleans - based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals judges wrote, «on its face does not impose an undue burden on the life and health of a woman.»

However, Ibrahimovic is likely to factor in his family into his decision, and although a short stint on a lucrative deal would be appealing, it might not be enough to sacrifice other aspects of his life.

«Yesterday's ruling was a landmark ruling that tells about the fact that our courts are working, rule of law is part of our lives and that our democracy is alive and kicking and that at any point in time we can be confident that we have a court to rely on and that when people feel aggrieved by decisions by an arm of government or a constitutional body, they can always appeal and have hearing and sometimes can have their grievances addressed in their favour.

A panel of five judges, headed by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas, announced their decision on «life - means - life» orders at the Court of appeal in London.

The U.S. Supreme Court vacated a decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, giving life to a case that can mean New Yorkers... Read More

Original story: After Left 4 Dead 2 was denied classification in Australia due to it containing «living humans with a rabies - like virus» and «realistic, frenetic and unrelenting violence,» a bummed out Valve appealed the decision, the results of which we'll learn on October 22, Gabe Newell revealed at a press conference during his Aussie visit.

A man of great charm, humour, zest for life and total privacy, very much the artist as gregarious loner, de Kooning was born in 1904 in Rotterdam to parents who divorced when he was five; his custody was given to the father, but his mother, who owned a bar, successfully appealed against the decision and brought him up.

The commission makes 100 recommendations featuring six overarching ones: the National Advice and Legal Support Fund mentioned before; prioritising public legal education in schools, alongside financial literacy, and in «education for life»; calling on government to clampdown down «preventable demand» by getting decisions right the first time including a «polluter pays» scheme for the DWP to pay costs on upheld appeals (on average 35 % of appeals against welfare benefits decisions are upheld); an overhaul of the courts to make them better suited for the needs of litigants in person; a national strategy for 2015 — 20, including a «minister for advice and legal support»; and for local authorities to commission local advice and legal support plans.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a decision that a lawyer must personally pay the legal costs of a hospital and a doctor involved in a legal battle with her, over her attempt to remove a client from life support, saying she was «intent on achieving her own personal objective.»

Pannone LLP partner, Richard Scorer, says: «The Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Court of Appeal judgment and to artificially restrict the human rights of British soldiers in this way, implying that the moment they step out of their base their human rights «end», seems partly at least to be due to a misconception that human rights would get in the way in the heat of battle and affect «life and death» decision making.

We have written about the Arizona Court of Appeals decision in the Van Dyke v. Steinle case in which the court of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love inAppeals decision in the Van Dyke v. Steinle case in which the court of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love inappeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love interest.

Kassburg v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2014 ONCA 922, is an Ontario Court of Appeal decision that was released without much fanfare due to the timing of the release (December 29, 2014, right in the middle of the holiday season).

This appeal considered whether a commissioning body can, by its decision not to fund a particular option for contact, remove the jurisdiction of the Court of Protection to make a best interests decision about contact, and whether the failure to conduct a best interests assessment and / or determine the facts breached the appellant's rights under the ECHR to a fair trial and a family life.

In Time for Action, the AJTC calls for the introduction of a 42 - day time limit for decision - makers to hear appeals on disability living allowance and other benefits.

There are stats for cases filed, applications for leave submitted, appeals heard, judgments (including number of unanimous vs. split decisions), and average time lapses (time lines in the life of a case at the Court)... [more]

The Supreme Court has allowed an appeal by the non-biological mother of a seven - year - old daughter: the birth mother's unilateral decision to take the child to Pakistan to live did not mean that child immediately lost her habitual residence in the UK.

Following the certification of the action by Justice Cumming, Living Realty brought a motion seeking leave to appeal Justice Cumming's original certification decision of September 12th, 2001.

In the recent decision of Fantl v Transamerica Life Canada («Fantl»)[1], the Ontario Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal of the Divisional Court's decision and confirmed the certification of class claims in negligent misrepresentation, noting that it was time for class actions to «deliver on their promise of access to justice» [2] when it comes to individual iAppeal unanimously dismissed the appeal of the Divisional Court's decision and confirmed the certification of class claims in negligent misrepresentation, noting that it was time for class actions to «deliver on their promise of access to justice» [2] when it comes to individual iappeal of the Divisional Court's decision and confirmed the certification of class claims in negligent misrepresentation, noting that it was time for class actions to «deliver on their promise of access to justice» [2] when it comes to individual issues.

Recent newspaper reports of Wall LJ's ruling to refuse a mother's application to appeal against a decision that her son should live with his father have highlighted the issue of the weight given to a child's wishes and feelings.

A recent Court of Appeal decision has highlighted the requirement for English law to develop to take into account the modernising society in which we live.

There are stats for cases filed, applications for leave submitted, appeals heard, judgments (including number of unanimous vs. split decisions), and average time lapses (time lines in the life of a case at the Court).

On April 25, 2012, the Federal Government announced that they will appeal the March 26, 2012, Ontario Court of Appeal decision striking down Canada's prostitution laws, specifically, Criminal Code provisions prohibiting «keeping or using a common bawdy house» (section 210) and the «living off the avails of prostitution» provision (section 212 (1)(j)-RRB- as unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of Cappeal the March 26, 2012, Ontario Court of Appeal decision striking down Canada's prostitution laws, specifically, Criminal Code provisions prohibiting «keeping or using a common bawdy house» (section 210) and the «living off the avails of prostitution» provision (section 212 (1)(j)-RRB- as unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of CAppeal decision striking down Canada's prostitution laws, specifically, Criminal Code provisions prohibiting «keeping or using a common bawdy house» (section 210) and the «living off the avails of prostitution» provision (section 212 (1)(j)-RRB- as unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Goldhar v. Haaretz.com on the issue of whether Ontario was the appropriate jurisdiction to litigate a defamation claim relating to an online publication by an Israeli newspaper that purported to defame Mr. Goldhar, who lives in Toronto but has business connections in Israel.

As such, the Court of Appeal concluded the appellants» decision to expend money improving their living conditions was not, for the purpose of the appeal, incurred because the appellants had been given assurances the houses would be tAppeal concluded the appellants» decision to expend money improving their living conditions was not, for the purpose of the appeal, incurred because the appellants had been given assurances the houses would be tappeal, incurred because the appellants had been given assurances the houses would be theirs.

The BC Court of Appeal upheld a Supreme Court decision that notaries are not allowed to prepare wills in British Columbia that create life estates or trusts under the Notaries act — in the decision Society of Notaries v Law Society of British Columbia 2017... Read more

Interestingly, it appears the Arizona Court of Appeals was sympathetic with Husbands» position by declaring it realized its decision may result in inequities in some situations when a spouse receiving spousal maintenance obtains an unfair advantage by living with someone and putting off marriage until the term of spousal maintenance is reached.

The Arizona Court of Appeals issued a decision regarding living together and spousal maintenance in Van Dyke v. Steinle regarding whether a former spouse's cohabitation with another person provides a basis to modify or terminate an Arizona spousal maintenance award.

The appeal decision in Martin was to award the claimant a life interest in her deceased partner's share of their property, meaning the claimant could remain living there for the rest of her life, after which half the capital value would pass to the estranged wife.

The precautionary principle has received considerably more local attention since the principle was mentioned (albeit in a non-binding part of the decision) in the Supreme Court of Canada's 2001 judgment in Spraytech v. Hudson and in the subsequent Ontario Court of Appeal decisions in R. v. City of Kingston and in Crop Life v. Toronto.

Family lawyers can breathe easy after an appeal court decision limited when life insurance proceeds can be counted towards the value of an estate, says Toronto estates litigator Alexander Turner.

Justice Hainey referred to the piercing of the corporate veil test in Transamerica Life Insurance Co. of Canada v. Canada Life Assurance Co., but also to the Ontario Court of Appeal's recent decision in Indcondo Building Corporation v. Sloan, which affirmed that this veil will only be pierced with wrongdoing akin to fraud in the establishment or use of the corporation.

But despite losing core funding from government sources, ONIWG and the injured worker movement can claim campaign successes in the following years, including: defeat of the proposal to amalgamate the Appeals Tribunal; recognition of chronic pain by the 2003 Supreme Court of Canada appeal decision in which ONIWG was an intervenor; changes in the Board's approach to maintenance treatment; reinstatement of the clothing allowance; reconsideration by the Board of its Early and safe return to work policy; reintroduction of cost of living adjustment; and focusing media attention on the perils of experience rating.

For example, although homeless people were successful in their Charter claim in Victoria (City) v Adams, this judicial bias is evident even in that case — the first to consider the relevance of international human rights law, including concerns and recommendations from the CESCR, to section 7 of the Charter.284 The BC Court of Appeal in Adams upheld the trial judge's decision that the City of Victoria was violating homeless persons» constitutional rights to life, liberty and security of the person by prohibiting them from erecting temporary overhead shelters in public parks.285 However the Court of Appeal was insistent on framing its decision as a negative «restraint» on government, rather than as a positive obligation.

I think the low rank of the Ontario Court of Appeal in the life span chart at 10.2 in the report can be explained, at least in part, by the large number of decisions released as brief endorsements.

The life spans of decisions of the various courts of appeal vary quite considerably, ranging from just under six years for the Ontario Court of Appeal to twelve years for the British Columbia Court of Appeal and sixteen years for the Northwest Territories Court of Aappeal vary quite considerably, ranging from just under six years for the Ontario Court of Appeal to twelve years for the British Columbia Court of Appeal and sixteen years for the Northwest Territories Court of AAppeal to twelve years for the British Columbia Court of Appeal and sixteen years for the Northwest Territories Court of AAppeal and sixteen years for the Northwest Territories Court of AppealAppeal.

Eli Lederman, a partner at Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP, says a recent Court of Appeal decision in Ontario adds to a growing trend that suggests trial judges may have greater freedom to determine whether parties are living up to their contractual obligations.

Perkins Coie's 1600 PTAB and Beyond blog reports from the intersection of the life sciences industry and key decisions and developments from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), district courts and appellate courts.

Farris partner Alison Narod is an administrative decision - maker, hearing cases as Disciplinary Panel Chair of Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada and as a tribunal member in the Community Care and Assisted Living Appeal Board and for a period on the list of arbitrators under BC Labour Relations Code.

In a long - awaited decision, the New York Court of Appeals in Kramer v. Phoenix Life Ins.

In this recent Court of Appeals case, the court's decision was to take the eight year - old child from Mom, with whom the child had been living since the child was born, and send the child to live with Dad and the new wife in Virginia.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's decision, recognizing that joint custody under a parallel parenting regime may be suitable where both parents love the child and should play an active role in the child's life, yet have difficulty communicating or reaching a consensus on the child's upbringing.