Sentences with phrase «of immunity provisions»

Not exact matches

Although the Chief Justice acknowledged that this argument had some merit, the more determinative factor — and the key difference between the statutory immunity provisions relied upon by the ERCB and Alberta Environment — was that the immunity clause with respect to the former explicitly contemplated the regulator as an entity («the Board or a member of the Board...») whereas the immunity provisions under the Water Act and the EPEA did not (referring only to «persons» in various capacities; see paras 62 — 71).

Counsel for Ms. Ernst argued that these were inapplicable in light of the pleadings that Alberta Environment had acted in bad faith (these provisions explicitly limit immunity to acts or omissions taken in good faith).

This would certainly seem to be effective to confer an immunity on the listed parties for losses that are incurred in the province; but what if a party outside the province suffers losses (see Reference re Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act, [1984] 1 SCR 297, 1984 CanLII 17 (SCC)-RRB-, or what if the exercise of authority under the Act rests upon a reckless understanding as to the constitutional underpinnings of a particular provision?

Even then, the district may have a defense against the liability in the form of «governmental immunity,» although laws regarding injury claims that establish this precedent differ considerably across states.7 All five states included in this analysis had some form of governmental immunity, but the strength of those provisions varies.

In such cases the provisions of paragraph 5 of this article shall also apply, except that the immunities therein mentioned shall cease to apply when such a courier has delivered to the consignee the diplomatic bag in his charge.

There are provisions of the U.S. Constitution such as the privileges and immunities clause that apply only to U.S. citizens, but the ones are cite are not among them.

Although immunity can be waived, keep in mind that even if a tribe has expressly waived sovereign immunity, there may be other procedural pitfalls, such as notice of claim provisions and statute of limitations deadlines pertaining to actions against the tribal government or employees.

The three dominant themes in 2008 cases where PIL was invoked were as follows: UK / EU law implementation of UNSC resolutions concerning freezing of alleged terrorist assets (sanctions cases); the acts / omissions of UK authorities in Iraq / Afghanistan viewed in the context of PIL and provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Human Rights Act 1998 (Iraq / Afghanistan related cases); and state / diplomatic immunity in the context of civil proceedings and / or attempts to enforce arbitration awards against assets of State entities in the UK (Civil immunity cases).

I don't know whether the same issue has arisen in U.K. caselaw, though I note that the U.K. State Immunity Act has a provision (s. 21) quite similar to s. 14 of the Canadian Act.

Section 1 (1) of the State Immunity Act provides foreign states with a general immunity from suit before the UK courts subject to the Act's proImmunity Act provides foreign states with a general immunity from suit before the UK courts subject to the Act's proimmunity from suit before the UK courts subject to the Act's provisions.

In doing so, it placed especial emphasis on the fact that a similarly structured provision was dropped from the final text of the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities for States and their Properties 2004, as it was considered contrary to the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, one of the cornerstones of international law.

O.C.G.A. § 16-11-135 is just one of many immunity provisions under Georgia law, and those with a possible negligence claim should always consider finding counsel experienced in the legal nuances of all the possible claims they may have.

State Immunity from Federal Disability Discrimination Laws: Provisions of the ADA and Rehabilitation Act Declared Unconstitutional, 8.

That jurisdiction is founded on statutory provision which requires the law of the DIFC to be first applied and only in absentia to move on to the cascading subparagraphs» provisions, of which the last is the law of England and Wales, which for reasons which are apparent, in the light of the decisions of the English Courts set out above (Burton J and Briggs LJ) on the absence of immunity of the KRG in the present case, does not assist the KRG.

In my judgment, there is no way of escaping the width of the waiver provisions, which specifically refer to the assets of the KRG and, as is accepted, of the KRI also, and can only be taken therefore to include a waiver of immunity from execution as well as suit.

Moreover, the waiver of immunity contended for was an implied waiver, said to arise from the arbitration agreement itself where it was agreed that the Award was to be «binding on the parties» and included a provision that the parties undertook «to carry out any Award without delay and should be deemed to have waived their right to any form or recourse insofar as such waiver can validly be made».

In doing so, he referred to the US and European provisions and to Article 7 (1)(b) of the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property, which Lord Bingham had referred to in Jones v Saudi Arabia [2007] 1 AC 70 at paragraphs 8 and 26 (d) as reflecting current international thinking.

It is to be noted that the peculiarity of the HKSAR's position in relation to the PRC, its Basic Law and the express provision therein requiring reference of matters within the powers of the Central People's Government to the Standing Committee, together with the PRC doctrine of absolute immunity, form the context in which this decision was made.

Notwithstanding that it had instructed Wilmer Hale, London - based solicitors who had represented it at all stages of the London - seated Arbitration and the related High Court proceedings, the KRG refused to give Wilmer Hale permission to accept service of the Claimants» application for a peremptory order, thus obliging the Claimants to serve that application in accordance with the slow and cumbersome provisions set out in section 12 (1) of the English State Immunity Act 1978 and Rule 6.44 of the English Civil Procedure Rules (the «English CPR»).......

In Benkharbouche v Embassy of Sudan, the Court declared that two provisions of the State Immunity Act 1978, which prevented members of the service staff of two embassies from bringing employment claims before the English courts, are incompatible with Articles 6 and 14 of the ECHR.

State courts have also recognized that legislative immunity provisions enshrined in state constitutions also protect this bedrock principle.12 Moreover, as one Florida appellate court noted, legislative immunity is integral to the constitutional separation of powers: «The power vested in the legislature under the Florida Constitution would be severely compromised if [the judicial branch could compel] legislators... to appear in court to explain why they voted a particular way or to describe their process of gathering information on a bill.»

Our trial attorneys have obtained numerous judgments for clients in both federal and state trial courts, including claims where provisions of the Tort Immunity Act were successfully argued to limit and / or completely bar claims.

No provision of this section, or of any other section of the Florida Statutes, whether read separately or in conjunction with any other provision, shall be construed to waive the immunity of the state or any of its agencies from suit in federal court, as such immunity is guaranteed by the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, unless such waiver is explicitly and definitely stated to be a waiver of the immunity of the state and its agencies from suit in federal court.

Articles 11 to 14 and Article 17 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union shall apply to the Judges, Advocates - General, Registrar and Assistant Rapporteurs of the Court of Justice of the European Union, without prejudice to the provisions relating to immunity from legal proceedings of Judges which are set out in the preceding paragraphs.

The function of a parallel Ontario provision (as well as the limits of such immunity where a plaintiff alleges bad faith conduct) is illustrated in the Ontario case of Deep.

Since it went beyond what was required by international law, the application of immunity to the Claimants amounted to an unlawful breach of the ECHR, art 6 (the right to a fair trial) as well as to the similar provisions of Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (art 47).

In respect of non-EU law rights, the Supreme Court re-affirmed the Court of Appeal's «declaration of incompatibility» under Human Rights Act 1998, stating that the relevant provisions of the State Immunity Act are contrary to the Claimants» right of access to the court and are discriminatory.

Once in a while I post on State Immunity, one of my favourites sub-themes in same being waiver of immunity, whether by contractual provision or following subImmunity, one of my favourites sub-themes in same being waiver of immunity, whether by contractual provision or following subimmunity, whether by contractual provision or following submission.

After the verdict, the defendants brought a «threshold motion» (Shaw v. Mkheyan, 2017 ONSC 851) for a declaration that Mr. Shaw's claims for general damages and future care costs were barred on the basis that his injuries did not fall within the exceptions to the statutory immunity provided for in sections 267.5 (3)(b) and 267.5 (b) of the Insurance Act, RSO 1990, c. I. 8 and the applicable regulations (the «threshold provisions»).

It found that the Code is paramount over statutory immunity provisions, that deliberative secrecy was irrelevant when the complainant only sought to rely on documents that were already disclosed, and that the rule of collateral attack was restricted to situations where a decision was sought to be overturned as opposed to having its facts re-litigated (¶ ¶ 64 - 66).

11KBW's Karen Steyn QC appeared in Benkharbouche and Janah (judgment 18 October 2017), in which the Supreme Court held that provisions of the State Immunity Act 1978 preventing...

Also, the law appears in direct conflict with 47 U.S.C. 230, a provision in the federal Communications Decency Act which provides intermediaries such as blogs, social networking sites and online publications with immunity from any legal obligations regarding the comments of downstream users.

Antitrust litigation has increased dramatically since Canada adopted its immunity program for the criminal provisions of the Competition Act (cartels and bid rigging).

The US Department of Justice (DoJ) has used the leniency and immunity provisions with some success to secure convictions, particularly in relation to cartel offences.

The effect of the statutory immunity provisions is that those in the boardroom are increasingly vulnerable to others rightly or wrongly blowing the whistle.

However, it concluded that the Russian courts had failed to examine whether the nature of the transaction underlying the claim was of a private law nature and to take into account the provisions of international law in favour of restrictive immunity.

While I still think I'm right as a conceptual matter that impossibility preemption generally turns on conduct rather than liability, the fact that it'd render the immunity provision a nullity is a problem since the question is ultimately one of statutory interpretation.

That provision, which is roughly equivalent to the safe harbor provisions in Section 512 of the DMCA, gives conditional immunity to Internet platforms for user - uploaded content, and rules out the imposition of a general obligation to monitor such content.