With statutes of repose, it is always crystal clear when the clock starts ticking: it starts running the moment the medical malpractice (or
other tortious act) is committed.
Not exact matches
You agree to indemnify and keep indemnified Us against any and all losses, proceedings, lost profits, damages, awards, expenses, costs (including increased administration and legal costs on a full indemnity basis), claims, actions and any
other losses or liabilities suffered by Us and arising from or relating to Your use of the service, information and / or
other material posted on the Service by You and / or arising from or due to any breach of contract, any
tortious act and / or omission and / or any breach of statutory due by You.
Those cases run the gamut of business and commercial issues, including: breach of contract, covenants not to compete,
tortious interference with contracts and business expectancies, shareholder disputes, partnership disputes, intellectual property, ERISA, Uniform Trade Secrets
Act, breach of fiduciary duty, indemnification, civil conspiracy, financial disputes, business dissolution and
other employment and related claims.
Reported cases include: Gill v Meyers (reasonableness and UCTA), Films Rover v Cannon Film Sales (test for grant of mandatory interlocutory injunction), Standard Chartered Bank v PNSC and
others (for SGS); Mattis v Toussaint (acted for defendant in successfully resisting claim for finder's fee in respect of stolen painting), Yukong Lines v Rendsburg — The Rialto (tortious conspiracy and ancillary injunctive relief against controller of corporation), REC v Thames Water (test for grant of interlocutory injunction in field of electricity supply), De Molestina and Others v Ponton (acted for defendant in successfully rescission of share distribution agreements), and Marubeni Corporation v Government of Mongolia (claim on state guar
others (for SGS); Mattis v Toussaint (
acted for defendant in successfully resisting claim for finder's fee in respect of stolen painting), Yukong Lines v Rendsburg — The Rialto (
tortious conspiracy and ancillary injunctive relief against controller of corporation), REC v Thames Water (test for grant of interlocutory injunction in field of electricity supply), De Molestina and
Others v Ponton (acted for defendant in successfully rescission of share distribution agreements), and Marubeni Corporation v Government of Mongolia (claim on state guar
Others v Ponton (
acted for defendant in successfully rescission of share distribution agreements), and Marubeni Corporation v Government of Mongolia (claim on state guarantee)
Karen represents employers in employment litigation and arbitration matters involving a variety of claims, including claims concerning age, sex, gender, race, national origin, disability, religion, the Family and Medical Leave
Act, the Fair Labor Standards
Act, retaliation, misappropriation, gross negligence, breach of contract, defamation,
tortious interference, covenants not to compete and
other employment laws and related torts.
Recognized as viable claims in
other states, these claims impose liability for either conspiring to have someone commit a tort or knowingly encouraging or assisting another person's
tortious act.
Belhaj and another v Straw and
others) and Rahmatullah (No 1) v Ministry of Defence and another [2017] UKSC 3 involved the alleged complicity of United Kingdom officials in allegedly
tortious acts of the UK or
other states overseas.
Acting for private equity funds in various high value Hong Kong litigation matters covering fraud, contract and
other tortious claims;
You should probably consult a lawyer if you are so detained, as there does not seem to be anything in the
Act that allows the company to prohibit you from doing so - or from doing else, for that matter, so long as you do not breach the peace or act in some other tortious mann
Act that allows the company to prohibit you from doing so - or from doing else, for that matter, so long as you do not breach the peace or
act in some other tortious mann
act in some
other tortious manner.
In
other words, it was thought that no sane plaintiffs» lawyer would sue in 1978 for a
tortious act that allegedly occurred in 1953, because the risk of dismissal was so obvious.