Sentences with phrase «people at all levels of court»

Our lawyers have studied at some of the most prestigious law schools in North America and have successfully argued and enforced the rights of injured people at all levels of court, including the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the Divisional Court and the Ontario Court of Appeal.

Not exact matches

In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the Supreme Court ruled 5 - 4 that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to own guns — at a federal level — and in 2010 the court said that protection applies at a local level as Court ruled 5 - 4 that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to own guns — at a federal level — and in 2010 the court said that protection applies at a local level as court said that protection applies at a local level as well.

In terms of satisfaction, when you take a step back and look at relationships in general and you consider that people have been dating or courting, forever, you'll see that dissatisfaction levels with dating and relationship experiences have always been high throughout history.

With over 20 years of experience in personal injury law at both the trial and appellate court levels, Attorney Burnside has represented people with brain and head trauma...

We say this because the division of powers part of the judgement (commencing at para 98) is full of all sorts of references to two levels of government (see e.g. para 141) and similar comments about «interlocking federal and provincial schemes» that make it abundantly clear that this Court has given no thought to the space within which indigenous laws may operate within the modern constitutional order (for recognition that the law making authority of aboriginal peoples pre-dated the Crown's acquisition of sovereignty, was not extinguished by that acquisition of sovereignty and was not impaired by the division of legislative powers between the federal and provincial governments in 1982 see Campbell v British Columbia (2000), 189 DLR (4th) 333 (BCSC) and Justice Deschamps in Beckman v Little Salmon / Carmacks First Nation, [2010] 3 SCR 103 at para 97).

As the Court held in paragraph 70 of its ruling of 14 June 2016: «Participation by the Parliament in the legislative process is the reflection, at Union level, of a fundamental democratic principle that the people should participate in the exercise of power through the intermediary of a representative assembly.»

So instead of having pro se people and trying to work around their lack of knowledge of the rules of evidence or their lack of knowledge at the various levels of procedures you have to operate in that court, we've got that exactly backwards.

While the domestic position of the UK courts offers generous safeguards (some of them go well beyond the ones available at EU level) for people involved in criminal proceedings, the situation is not so clear - cut in other areas.

«We have a judiciary at the highest level, the Texas Supreme Court, that gets 40 to 50 percent of its campaign money from the very people who are practicing before that court,» said Craig McDonald, head of Texans for Public Justice, a follow - the - money political watcCourt, that gets 40 to 50 percent of its campaign money from the very people who are practicing before that court,» said Craig McDonald, head of Texans for Public Justice, a follow - the - money political watccourt,» said Craig McDonald, head of Texans for Public Justice, a follow - the - money political watchdog.

Having concluded that, as a matter of empirical fact (on which more below), the fees at issue deter substantial numbers of people from pursuing their claims, the Court asked itself whether «the text of» the statute pursuant to which the fees were imposed by the executive, «but also the constitutional principles which underlie the text, and the principles of statutory interpretation which give effect to those principles» [65] provided authority for setting the fees at their current level.

5) Despite the shortages of judges in almost every level of courts in every province, Courts usually do have at least 10 minutes to listen to pcourts in every province, Courts usually do have at least 10 minutes to listen to pCourts usually do have at least 10 minutes to listen to people.

It was accepted that the orders had implemented the first defendant lord chancellor's prior policy decision (the decision) that the principle of «full cost recovery» in setting court fees (the principle) should be applied to public law family proceedings; that the rationale for the decision had been a wish to fix fees at a level which reflected the true cost to the courts services and to replace the then extant model which involved heavy subsidisation; and that s 92 of the Courts Act 2003 (CA 2003) was relevant insofar as it empowered the lord chancellor to prescribe court fees by order, and that it set out obligations to «consult» specified judicial persons, the Civil Justice Council in civil proceedings, and «persons likely to have to pay [fees]», prior to the making of any ocourts services and to replace the then extant model which involved heavy subsidisation; and that s 92 of the Courts Act 2003 (CA 2003) was relevant insofar as it empowered the lord chancellor to prescribe court fees by order, and that it set out obligations to «consult» specified judicial persons, the Civil Justice Council in civil proceedings, and «persons likely to have to pay [fees]», prior to the making of any oCourts Act 2003 (CA 2003) was relevant insofar as it empowered the lord chancellor to prescribe court fees by order, and that it set out obligations to «consult» specified judicial persons, the Civil Justice Council in civil proceedings, and «persons likely to have to pay [fees]», prior to the making of any orders.

Governments, of course, are the ultimate «duty - bearers» and courts the final arbiters of constitutional rights — but to become meaningful to homeless people and those living in poverty, Charter rights must inform the ongoing implementation of strategies, not merely the final review of their constitutionality and they must guide decision - making at every level, not merely in the courts.

In the July 2016 ruling, the Supreme Court said trials at the provincial court level had to be concluded within 18 months of a person being charged and those in Court of Queen's Bench had to be done in 30 moCourt said trials at the provincial court level had to be concluded within 18 months of a person being charged and those in Court of Queen's Bench had to be done in 30 mocourt level had to be concluded within 18 months of a person being charged and those in Court of Queen's Bench had to be done in 30 moCourt of Queen's Bench had to be done in 30 months.

Perceived positive outcomes for the model include: decline in crime rate and level of violence; an effective community corrections program at Palm Island that has kept people from appearing before court and from possible incarceration; dramatic decrease in juvenile crime at Kowanyama; changes in social patterns; more effective government service delivery, leading to savings in time and money for government and community agencies, courts, law enforcement agencies and correctional centres.

Now that the key principles guiding the law of native title have been crystallized by the High Court and the implications of these decisions are being felt by Indigenous people, a re-evaluation of the law needs to occur at the political level.