It also differs from public liability which is part of tort law that concentrates
on civil wrongs and liabilities.
Not exact matches
They were
wrong on slavery, voting rights,
civil rights and a slew of other issues.
*********************************** One would hope that voters were casting their ballots
on the basis of what they conclude is best for a
civil society and a pluralistic population, not
on the more egocentric opinions they may have about right or
wrong that are derived from their religious beliefs.
Sorry Dude but Christianity's history has proven they are always
on the
wrong side or morality when it comes to
civil rights.
The war between right and
wrong, good and evil, the old self and new self in Christ rages
on, and so to look for instructions and fulfillment
on how to live better lives is like looking to a country in the midst of
civil war for instructions
on how to set up a functioning government.
While I can prove Phil Roberston's assessment
wrong by opening up any book
on the Jim Crow Era and the
Civil Right Movement, I don't think that would create space for Shalom.
Christians like you in American history has always been
on the
wrong side of
civil rights and morality.
So if that is the case, why do I have such a humanitarian heart, compassion to those that are even of evil doing, forgiving to those who do
wrongs against me, and why is my conversations
on issues in my life with Christ the utmost
civil and peaceful?
How can our Christian witness survive if we're
on the
wrong side of what many now call «the great
civil rights issue of our time»?
I'm no Graham fan but you're dead
wrong about Graham
on civil rights.
Or, if we are intelligent enough to recognize things that are
wrong based
on reason and self - interest (for building a
civil society), then indefinite detention and torture are fundamentally
wrong.
So we're going to try to pull back
on this, and I don't think it's
wrong or mean or insensitive to
civil rights or human rights.
You sound just like the people in the dark ages did when they were against
civil rights for African Americans and women, you're the one
on the
wrong side of the moral debate with no facts to back yourselves up.
Depending
on your personal priorities — keeping New York competitive, affordable health care,
civil rights, tenant protections, government reform — everybody's list of «what's
wrong with Albany» would look different.»
«I have to say I think he was
wrong to make these remarks because one of the things we pride ourselves [
on] in Britain, and I think rightly so, is that the armed forces, the
civil service are non-political,» he told BBC Radio Four's Any Questions?
Dominic Raab, the new MP for Esher and Walton (and author of the excellent The Assault
on Liberty: What Went
Wrong with Rights) set out his stall as the
civil libertarian - in - chief among the new intake in his maiden speech yesterday:
When pressed
on the issue of sexual abuse within the Church, Francis gets a bit more specific, saying that «a priest who does this betrays the body of the Lord,» and noting that the Church must support
civil courts in rectifying these
wrongs.
-- The movie will center
on Scott Lang and Hope Van Dyne
on the run after the events of «Captain America:
Civil War», trying to prevent the Ant - Man technology from falling into the
wrong hands
Marvel isn't
wrong — it is a very diverse brand, and its Captain America:
Civil War releasing
on May 6 sports a robust ensemble cast with many actors of color, for a blockbuster superhero flick.
Melnick's op - ed is based
on a new article in Education Next, «
Civil Wrongs: Federal Equity Initiative Promotes Paperwork, Not Equality.»
SOS12 Karran Harper Royal: How [some] African Americans and
Civil Rights Leaders Got
on the
Wrong Side of the Ed Reform Movement from Grassroots Education Movement
on Vimeo.
In raising questions about charters, Brill says, unions are
on the
wrong side of the
civil rights issue of this generation.
The strategy is to divide conservative candidates and moderate voters; framing conservatives as standing
on the morally
wrong side of the climate change issue; as they have been portrayed in the gay marriage and
Civil Rights debates.9 The NextGen campaign applies a master narrative that is adapted to each state, emphasizing that climate change poses a serious threat to the economy, public health, and children, and that if a candidate doesn't believe in climate change, they can't be trusted.
Then a colleague
on the Canadian
civil society delegation pointed out that it doesn't much serve climate justice, only shifts the locus of climate injustice, if developed countries accept financial responsibility for loss and damage — then see their historic
wrongs paid for by a farmer in rural Britain or a first - or second - generation immigrant family in Calgary who pay their taxes, rather than a multinational fossil that doesn't.
There's nothing
wrong with $ 150 per hour for a new lawyer handling
civil litigation, or 30 % contingency
on a personal injury case, or a $ 500 flat fee to handle a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
The only real difference between the crime (s 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997) and the tort (s 3) is standard of proof: to prove the
civil wrong of harassment it is necessary to prove the case
on a balance of probabilities.
For instance, the Shari'a
civil court would nearly always (perhaps automatically) grant the father's wish to have the son brought up in the Islamic faith, this is in itself might appear a tad discriminatory against the mother, and (I could be
wrong as I am not an expert) appears to be based
on the fact that the Shari'a
civil court might not attach the same weight to the mother's wishes (to put it in neutral terms).
He got his first break as a
Civil Court Trial Lawyer when a major negligence firm wanted someone to act as their trial lawyer for a plaintiff who had driven a car
on the
wrong side of the road and had been involved in a head -
on collision.
It seems arguable that
civil wrongs, alleged or decreed, should not support as broad bans
on social media access and use as criminal offences.
So we could, in theory, create criminal penalties to take the place of
civil wrongs, and spend much more
on criminal prosecutions of those
wrongs as they do elsewhere.
Unlike criminal cases, personal injury cases are
civil lawsuits based
on «torts» or social
wrongs in which a person or business entity is found to have acted below the standard of care for a specific situation.
An employee fired for cause who conceals this fact commits a
civil wrong and an employer may rescind an offer based
on this omission and may even seek damages.
[33] The Tribunal is of the view that the Appellant could not be unaware of the scope of her actions, and that in this context, it does not accept the Appellant's argument that it was [translation] «ignorance»
on her part, a [translation] «lack of understanding» of the
Civil Service Act, that she was not [translation] «aware of the exact procedure», that she had misinterpreted it, or that she was unaware that [translation] «consulting a personal file was
wrong,» which she stopped doing following her meeting with her employer
on May 15, 2013 (Exhibits GD2 - 2 and GD2 - 5).
Sinclair was pretty bad,
on the
wrong side of good sense and
civil liberty, but as it turns out I jumped the gun.
The situation often arises where for some reason a barrister
on behalf of a former lawyer's client not only sues an alleged tort feasor (a person who commits a tort or
civil wrong) but also their prior lawyer, alleging negligence.