Sentences with phrase «paying claimants»

Insurance companies are focused on making profits, not paying claimants fairly.

If such claims are successful the defendant can be forced to stop using the relevant trade mark and may also be liable to pay the claimant damages or an account of its profits, as well as legal costs.

In 50 % of these cases, the tribunals refrained from ordering the unsuccessful defendant to pay the claimant's legal costs.

Under this scheme the claimant is not required to pay the defendant's costs if the claim fails, but the defendant pays the claimant's costs if the claim succeeds.

The new additional bonus will be on top of the defendant's existing liability in this situation to pay the claimant interest post - offer on the whole or part of damages of up to 10 % above base rate; indemnity costs post-offer (and indemnity costs trump the proportionality argument which will be runnable with a vengeance under the new regime); and interest on costs at up to 10 % above base rate.

Some 36 % of claimants who had not received payment had attempted to enforce the award through the county court, and 40 % of unpaid or part paid claimants did not know that the award could be enforced through the county court.

MPs will also vote on an amendment that would force publishers to pay claimants» costs, win or lose, in any data protection action brought against them, unless they are a member of a state - backed regulator.

The usual order would be for the defendant to pay the claimant's costs to the date of expiry of the Pt 36 offer.

[12] As stated earlier, starting in October 2008, the respondent failed to pay the claimant $ 20,000 per month spousal support.

In Dandpat Lady Justice Arden accepted the EAT's view that: «if interim relief was granted the respondent is irretrievably prejudiced because he is obliged to keep the contract continuing and pay the claimant until the conclusion of the proceedings, and for those reasons it was a consequence which should not be imposed lightly.»

This recommendation was said to have grossly underestimated any compensation that would have been due to female equal pay claimants.

The issue here is whether Progressive can recover what was paid the the claimants through the exercise of its right of subrogation.

It contended that since the claim exceeded the maximum amount that the defendant could require a firm to pay a claimant, fairness required that it be determined by litigation in court, and the defendant should accordingly decline jurisdiction.

His Honour Judge Bird had found that the breaches were both serious and deliberate, but in view of the mitigation put forward on his behalf, he decided not to impose any penalty on Mr King Mason, but ordered that he should pay the Claimant's solicitor's costs on an indemnity basis.

Following a summary trial pursuant to Rule 9 - 7 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, the court ordered ICBC to pay the claimant the Part 7 benefits claimed in the amount of $ 10,863.86.

One of the key considerations for the court was the fact that the bank had the resources to pay the claimants» claims and therefore it was just that they should be held liable.

While it is a business's goal to make money, insurance companies are expected to pay claimants when a legitimate claim is made.

The district judge ordered the defendant to pay the claimants» costs to be determined by detailed assessment.

In Buglife, the court considered that, while it may be appropriate to make an order capping the liability of the defendant to pay the claimant's costs if the claimant wins, «there should be no assumption, whether explicit or implicit, that it is appropriate, where the claimant's liability for costs is capped, that the defendant's liability for costs should be capped in the same amount....

● an equal pay claimant can claim under more than one of the heads of liability in the Equal Pay Act 1970, s 1 (2) in respect of the same period, without running foul of the doctrine of res judicata; and

In this high profile case, equal pay claimants insisted on taking their claims to the full (with conditional fee agreement legal backing) instead of going with union - negotiated compromises and are suing their union for sex discrimination in not pursuing their claims sufficiently.

However, the tribunal decided that all the respondents should be jointly and severally liable to pay the claimant # 421,415.

In spite of these complications it was accepted that ultimately much depended on one simple question — whether an equal pay claimant can compare herself with a successor male employee.

Dominion served Unifund with a Notice of Commencement of Arbitration on November 5, 2012, initiating arbitration proceedings to determine the insurer responsible for paying the claimant's SABS.

Unifund argued that such notice was a statutory precondition to Dominion's claim that Unifund pay the claimant's SABS.

This District Forum however, found the insurer deficient and gave it directions to pay the claimant required insurance amounts combined with 9 % annual interest.

«Award is passed and directing Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company to pay the claimants a sum of Rs 15,41,750,» the court said.

Not exact matches

Beginning in the 7th week, a pay cut of 30 % is considered «suitable» for a frequent claimant, while a cut of 20 % is considered «suitable» for an occasional claimant.

For example, a job offering a salary of $ 13 / hour could be rejected by a claimant if the hourly wage normally paid for the same type of job in its region was between $ 16 - 18.

The agreement also stipulates that child benefits for children of EU migrants living overseas will now be paid at a rate based on the cost of living in their home country — applicable immediately to new arrivals and from 2020 to the 34,000 existing claimants.

Originally, credits were paid to people on their retirement, but towards the end of the scheme's life they were paid on demand to any claimants who could prove their right to them, including the heirs of the original wartime taxpayer.

The few like Ben Bradshaw need to stop whining about being caught milking the many - and start paying back, as overpaid benefit claimants would have to.

Claim: In 2012 IDS boasted that the roll out of Universal Credit would improve the lives of millions of claimants by «incentivising work and making work pay.»

Suggestions include scrapping any wait period and giving claimants money immediately; stopping phone - line charges - it costs 55p a minute to call the helpline; and changing the system so that money is paid out fortnightly rather than monthly to help claimants budget.

He has suggested EU claimants should only receive the level of benefit paid by their own country.

The judge also ordered the NEC to repay three of the claimants» # 25 fee, which they had paid on top of their membership dues in order to vote in the contest.

The Autumn Statement announcement confirms that, where the qualifying disability benefit is being paid by DWP, HMRC will award the extra child disability elements from 6 April 2016 without claimants needing to contact them.

Halliday claimed that the case was a clear matter for his client, as the bank had never sought an approval from the claimant before such huge sum of money was withdrawn from his account and paid to Bayelsa State Government's account.

This will save the exchequer up to # 270 million a year and will reduce the housing benefit paid to some claimants, particularly in central London.

The Tory threat to cap benefits at # 23,000 a year made people think that this is what most claimants get; it is not true, and ignores the fact that many are actually workingpeople, just not paid enough.

Things are more complicated for claimants who live in a universal credit full service area where it may be no longer possible to make a new claim for tax credits.2 LITRG recommends that anyone in these areas who misses the 30 - day extension period and is concerned that they can no longer claim tax credits should contact HMRC or a local welfare rights specialist as soon as possible before making a claim for universal credit.3 Tax credits are paid to people who are responsible for children or young people and working people on low incomes, whether or not they have responsibility for a child / young person, and are based on household income and circumstances.

Also, let's not forget the $ 500,000,000 in lawsuits NYC pays to claimants every year.

Osborne's forecasts of continued austerity in the next parliament, a media and public discourse which continues to harden public opinion against claimants, and an ongoing failure to fix underlying causes of social security spend — by building houses and creating well - paying jobs — all mean that our social security system is heading in the direction of much more short - termism.

In those cases, HMRC will have made a decision based on information they held and would have been forced to classify the case as claimant error, fraud or HMRC error without any direct dialogue with the claimant · The reported figures materially underestimate official error in the system with little or no attention paid to «contributory error» (where the error is primarily a claimant error but to which HMRC have contributed in some indirect way).

In order to qualify, claimants must meet a number of conditions including a requirement to be in paid work.

«Paying universal credit to one claimant in a household assumes that money will be fairly shared, but we know that women and children tend to lose out if payments go directly to their husband or partner.

The UK's broken compensation system heaps costs onto consumers, taxpayers and businesses: Higher insurance premiums for UK consumers, who pay # 2.7 million a day to claimant lawyers through their motor insurance premiums.

New under - occupancy rules mean claimants with spare bedrooms will be punished by getting less of their rent paid for by housing benefit.

More than half of claimants affected by the cap receive Income Support, which is mostly paid to single parents, and fully 91 % are in receipt of child tax credit - neither of which requires claimants to try and find work.

For low value personal injury motor accident claims, for every # 1 insurers pay in compensation, a further 87 pence is paid to claimant lawyers.