Sentences with phrase «point claimed in court»

Whilst in BNI custody, he was said to be in solitary confinement and at one point claimed in court that the security operatives wanted to kill him through food poisoning.

Not exact matches

Judge Noonan points out that the employee was not required to participate in or even listen to the services; he then recounts the historical record of free exercise claims under the Court's «compelling state interest» standard:

Riggs claims he had contemplated serving underhand at some point in the match but changed his mind because he didn't want to «embarrass» Court.

It's definitely escalated to a point that it will end up in the courts over these claims.»

To do that, Cuomo is proposing a five - point plan that starts with what he said would be the strongest campaign disclosure rules in the nation — including revealing client lists from outside businesses, which he said are not protected, as lawmakers have claimed in court.

«May we also point out that since his arrest and even up to about a week ago, our son has made several overtures to the arresting authority for him to refund the money since they now claim in court that it came from government coffers.

Myriad noted that the court had rejected five of the six Myriad methods claims in dispute, but pointed out that 237 other methods claims for its cancer risk test, BRACAnalysis, were not affected.

In response to the Fourteenth Amendment claim, the court said that at some point, removing M.C. from the classroom and putting him in timeout might have gone so far as to deprive him of a protected interest in a public education, but the circuit judges, unlike the district court, concluded that 21 timeouts totaling approximately 12 hours over two and a half months did not go that faIn response to the Fourteenth Amendment claim, the court said that at some point, removing M.C. from the classroom and putting him in timeout might have gone so far as to deprive him of a protected interest in a public education, but the circuit judges, unlike the district court, concluded that 21 timeouts totaling approximately 12 hours over two and a half months did not go that fain timeout might have gone so far as to deprive him of a protected interest in a public education, but the circuit judges, unlike the district court, concluded that 21 timeouts totaling approximately 12 hours over two and a half months did not go that fain a public education, but the circuit judges, unlike the district court, concluded that 21 timeouts totaling approximately 12 hours over two and a half months did not go that far.

Ever the magnet for controversy, Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson was partially vindicated this week when the British high court ruled in favor of the show and of the BBC, dismissing electric carmaker Tesla's claim that the show misrepresented its Roadster's range by pointing out that it was only able to

By auto - rejecting even people with good claims, the banks succeed in stopping many people either going on to the Ombudsman or taking their claim to court as people give up, and that's the whole point.

«SK simply wants to defer any consideration of the sufficiency of its pleading so it can oppress Epic with burdensome and expensive discovery,» the UE3 vendor states in its latest court filing, recounted in depth on Next - Gen, adding that SK's claims that Epic lied about its engines are built on «false statement of material fact» points out Gamasutra.

Next, the court pointed out that the wife herself had chosen Ontario as the proper jurisdiction when she commenced the divorce application and claimed custody in that province, and had raised the issue of jurisdiction only after the criminal charges against the father were withdrawn in July of 2010.

The second point to make is this court's insistence in this case on the need for medical evidence to substantiate a claim for aggravated damages.

It asked the court to tell the jury about that interpretation of the patent (which will now finally happen, tomorrow, as a result of the Federal Circuit decision), and it wanted to point to Apple's own 60 - cent - per - device damages claim over this patent in the Motorola case.

In Nasr, the Court has signalled that a formal denial letter is a signpost marking the end of negotiations and the commencement of a period in which litigation is legally «appropriate» — at which point the claim is «discovered» and the limitation period begins to ruIn Nasr, the Court has signalled that a formal denial letter is a signpost marking the end of negotiations and the commencement of a period in which litigation is legally «appropriate» — at which point the claim is «discovered» and the limitation period begins to ruin which litigation is legally «appropriate» — at which point the claim is «discovered» and the limitation period begins to run.

Judgment has been handed down today by the Court of Appeal in JSCS Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Kolomoisky & Ors, in which the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by Tatneft, a Russian oil major, on all points against a judgment of Picken J late last year in which he had dismissed Tatneft's claims and supporting worldwide freezing injunctions against four well - known Ukrainian businessmen, including Gennadiy Bogolyubov and Igor Kolomoysky.

The claim makes a point in para. 12 of noting that Tasini was also the lead plaintiff in the class - action, New York Times Co. v. Tasini, 533 U.S. 483 (2001), which was successful at the Supreme Court of the United States in finding that the New York Times could not license freelance journalist work in back issues of electronic databases.

It also shows the weakest point in the Court's argument, which is the claim that if it did not decide the case in this way, «it would not be possible to put a stop to the active contribution of an undertaking to a restriction of competition».

In 1985 another case came before the courts regarding the trust of an individual who had been badly injured and rendered «mentally incompetent» in the Halifax Explosion, at this point the individual was around 68 years old and living in a facility which claimed that the trust, which had been set up by his father after his injuries in the explosion, should be paying his fees for the facilitIn 1985 another case came before the courts regarding the trust of an individual who had been badly injured and rendered «mentally incompetent» in the Halifax Explosion, at this point the individual was around 68 years old and living in a facility which claimed that the trust, which had been set up by his father after his injuries in the explosion, should be paying his fees for the facilitin the Halifax Explosion, at this point the individual was around 68 years old and living in a facility which claimed that the trust, which had been set up by his father after his injuries in the explosion, should be paying his fees for the facilitin a facility which claimed that the trust, which had been set up by his father after his injuries in the explosion, should be paying his fees for the facilitin the explosion, should be paying his fees for the facility.

BC Injury Law And ICBC Claims Blog Subjective Soft Tissue Injuries And Judicial Scrutiny Last year I criticized the often recited judicial passage stating that «``... the Court should be exceedingly careful when there is little or no objective evidence of continuing injury and when complaints of pain persist for long periods extending beyond the normal or usual recovery...» and pointing out that these comments should no longer be used given Supreme Court of Canada's reasons in FH v. McDougall.

There were a few points of greater interest in the county court reform consultation, notably the introduction of «pre-action dispute management», the tripling of the small claims limit and the big mediation push.

My analysis on that point was, though, premised on principles of administrative law — my claim was that the Court was correct to hold that the Law Society of Manitoba acted within its statutory authority in requiring lawyers to complete mandatory continuing professional development, and in automatically suspending them if they failed to do so.

Whereas, as the Court points out, it is indeed for the national court to assess whether national law reaches an adequate balance between different interests in line with the definition of occupational requirements discussed above [§ 80], the Court does not clearly assess the implications of the alternative claim in EU law (direct effect) if the national court does not, in the end, manage to reconcile these interests through interpretaCourt points out, it is indeed for the national court to assess whether national law reaches an adequate balance between different interests in line with the definition of occupational requirements discussed above [§ 80], the Court does not clearly assess the implications of the alternative claim in EU law (direct effect) if the national court does not, in the end, manage to reconcile these interests through interpretacourt to assess whether national law reaches an adequate balance between different interests in line with the definition of occupational requirements discussed above [§ 80], the Court does not clearly assess the implications of the alternative claim in EU law (direct effect) if the national court does not, in the end, manage to reconcile these interests through interpretaCourt does not clearly assess the implications of the alternative claim in EU law (direct effect) if the national court does not, in the end, manage to reconcile these interests through interpretacourt does not, in the end, manage to reconcile these interests through interpretation.

The case had been before the Court of Appeal three times in 1999 and 2000 and involved points on illegality, whether contributory negligence is a defence to a claim in fraud, the liability of a company director for fraud and the assessment of damages in deceit.

If you are not satisfied with how your matter is being handled, you have the right to discharge your attorney and terminate the attorney - client relationship at any time (court approval may be required in some matters and your attorney may have a claim against you for the value of services rendered to you up to the point of discharge).

The facile pundits who claim Stevens is the Court's liberal hero or bum — depending on their point of view — overlook the fact that in 1987, Stevens publicly endorsed President Ronald Reagan's choice of archconservative Judge Robert Bork to replace Justice Lewis Powell Jr..

«The Abramovich judgment means any potential claims targeted at high profile Russian «Oligarchs» in the English High Court must be carefully considered from a jurisdiction point of view before proceeding.

Judge Newman filed a separate dissent, pointing out that all amicus briefs submitted in the case argued against different standards in PTAB and district court proceedings, stressing the concern that different claim constructions would lead to uncertainty a lack of predictability in patent rights.

Courts will continue to use their discretion to determine whether a litigant is impoverished or in need to the point that but for the hearing fees, they would be able to pursue their claim, thus qualifying for an exemption.»

This point has been exercised recently in the US courts in relation to shareholder claims but whereas there have been some indications that the US court would entertain claims from English shareholders, recent decisions show a more conservative approach as to who can sue there.

Moreover, the wide construction made sense from a practical point of view in this case: given the allegations of forgery made by the claimant, the judge hearing the claimant's I (PFD) A 1975 claim might exercise the court's power to call in the grant of its own motion under the Supreme Court Act 1981, s 121 — which could result in further, and potentially unnecessary, expense for a modest escourt's power to call in the grant of its own motion under the Supreme Court Act 1981, s 121 — which could result in further, and potentially unnecessary, expense for a modest esCourt Act 1981, s 121 — which could result in further, and potentially unnecessary, expense for a modest estate.

In Ernst the Court of Appeal does not cite any of these Alberta cases, but rather points to the 2011 Supreme Court of Canada decision in R v Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, 2011 SCC 42, where at paras 17 to 26 the Supreme Court sets out the test to be met for a motion to strike claims for the failure to disclose a reasonable cause of actioIn Ernst the Court of Appeal does not cite any of these Alberta cases, but rather points to the 2011 Supreme Court of Canada decision in R v Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, 2011 SCC 42, where at paras 17 to 26 the Supreme Court sets out the test to be met for a motion to strike claims for the failure to disclose a reasonable cause of actioin R v Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, 2011 SCC 42, where at paras 17 to 26 the Supreme Court sets out the test to be met for a motion to strike claims for the failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

More on point for most of the court cases in this area, the Committee explained that «whether an attorney has an obligation to disclose a mistake to a client will depend *** on all relevant facts, such as whether the error or omission gives rise to a colorable malpractice claim, is capable of correction or is injurious to a client.»

In reaching this decision the court referred to a leading BC Court of Appeal Case where it was held that «a Plaintiff does not have an on - going obligation to assess the quantum (value) of a claim and that the point in time for a consideration of whether a plaintiff had a sufficient reason for bringing a proceeding in the Supreme Court is the time of the initiation of the action.&raquIn reaching this decision the court referred to a leading BC Court of Appeal Case where it was held that «a Plaintiff does not have an on - going obligation to assess the quantum (value) of a claim and that the point in time for a consideration of whether a plaintiff had a sufficient reason for bringing a proceeding in the Supreme Court is the time of the initiation of the action.&rcourt referred to a leading BC Court of Appeal Case where it was held that «a Plaintiff does not have an on - going obligation to assess the quantum (value) of a claim and that the point in time for a consideration of whether a plaintiff had a sufficient reason for bringing a proceeding in the Supreme Court is the time of the initiation of the action.&rCourt of Appeal Case where it was held that «a Plaintiff does not have an on - going obligation to assess the quantum (value) of a claim and that the point in time for a consideration of whether a plaintiff had a sufficient reason for bringing a proceeding in the Supreme Court is the time of the initiation of the action.&raquin time for a consideration of whether a plaintiff had a sufficient reason for bringing a proceeding in the Supreme Court is the time of the initiation of the action.&raquin the Supreme Court is the time of the initiation of the action.&rCourt is the time of the initiation of the action.»

All About Information SCC makes a modest point in favouring local court's jurisdiction over privacy claim

Mummery LJ points out that the real purpose of the discretion in s 2 (3) is to deal with «mixed claims» where equal pay is one of several issues before the court and splitting it off would be in the interests of judicial efficiency; it is not really addressed to issues such as those in these cases.

The book provides a point of departure for Sunstein's playful meditation on «the force» of serendipity in constitutional law, and it illustrates how storytellers — both moviemakers and Supreme Court justices — often conceal or refuse to acknowledge authorial responsibility for serendipitous creative decisions, with claims that their discoveries were externally predetermined.

The Claimants made a number of points in relation to service: first, they said that the Riyadh Convention was permissive in providing for service or notification by the means set out, not mandatory; secondly, they said that if it was mandatory it did not set out the documents which had to be served or notified in the prescribed manner, which was a matter for the DIFC Court; thirdly, and as an overriding point, if the KRG was not immune from suit, there had to be some way to enforce the Awards and the KRG could not be allowed to stymie service or notification under the Riyadh Convention by effectively claiming sovereign immunity unjustifiably.

In particular, we want to point out that by accepting these Terms, you and we are agreeing to arbitrate any dispute between us, and you are giving up your right to go to court either individually (except for matters that may be taken to small claims court) or as part of a class action.

The key question for consideration in the Supreme Court was, at what point did the Statute of Limitations start running, was it when the foundations of the houses were laid (in which case the Plaintiffs» claim would be statute barred) or was it when the cracks in the houses appeared?

Step 5: Win at trial in front of a judge that somehow didn't get the memo that the Washington Supreme Court in Chaplin eliminated the need for Selby's to even make their adverse possession claim «in good faith under a claim of right»... certainly because the attorney didn't bother to raise this point... along I suspect with hiring a surveyor to testify as an expert witness.

Finally, we might note that the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal provides a point of comparison in relation to fees for online courts as it becomes the first small claims court to go online in a similar way.

(Part 1: The Motion), S.C. Law., May 2013, at 54, 54 («After speaking informally with several state court judges, I realized that they are reluctant to grant summary judgment motions except in cases in which the claims are almost to the point of being frivolous.»)

Conceding that this may appear unfair, the Court also pointed out that the wife's equalization claim in this case was based primarily on the value of a single asset: the farm property, which happened to be exempt from bankruptcy under Manitoba legislation and therefore not accessible to creditors.

We should point out that if an English court were to determine that Assange's status as a diplomat is ordinarily determined by notification by Ecuador, the argument suggested in Dapo's previous post that that such a claim of diplomatic status might be defeated because of an abuse of rights relating to the conferral of Ecuadorian nationality would remain a possibility.

In rejecting an argument that a conversion claim against a towing company, which had sold a towed vehicle despite the owner's efforts to reclaim it, was preempted by federal law governing a «service» of motor carriers, the Second District cited an internet news story about the inventor of the tow truck.29 The court relied on facts from that article to make the temporal point that Florida law permitted claims for conversion of property before there were tow trucks.

In Allen v London Borough of Southwark [2008] EWCA Civ 1478, [2008] All ER (D) 113 (Nov) the Court of Appeal considered whether the bringing of five separate possession claims, each raising the same bad point, could amount to harassment under PHA 1997.

There has been a particular problem with the dates required to be given in the s 21 notice served on the tenant, but the recent Court of Appeal case of Spencer v Taylor [2013] EWCA Civ 1600 has made this easier for tenancies that began as fixed term tenancies, to the point where one judge commented that the failure rate for claims under the accelerated procedure has since fallen by two - thirds.

In their petition filed in November with the Superior Court of Quebec in Chateauguay — not far from the scene of the deadly April accident on Autoroute 30 that claimed the lives of 56 - year - old Carole Downer of Ontario and three people in the other vehicle — the family points to a coroner's report that labelled signalization at a critical point of entry onto that stretch of highway as «inadequate.&raquIn their petition filed in November with the Superior Court of Quebec in Chateauguay — not far from the scene of the deadly April accident on Autoroute 30 that claimed the lives of 56 - year - old Carole Downer of Ontario and three people in the other vehicle — the family points to a coroner's report that labelled signalization at a critical point of entry onto that stretch of highway as «inadequate.&raquin November with the Superior Court of Quebec in Chateauguay — not far from the scene of the deadly April accident on Autoroute 30 that claimed the lives of 56 - year - old Carole Downer of Ontario and three people in the other vehicle — the family points to a coroner's report that labelled signalization at a critical point of entry onto that stretch of highway as «inadequate.&raquin Chateauguay — not far from the scene of the deadly April accident on Autoroute 30 that claimed the lives of 56 - year - old Carole Downer of Ontario and three people in the other vehicle — the family points to a coroner's report that labelled signalization at a critical point of entry onto that stretch of highway as «inadequate.&raquin the other vehicle — the family points to a coroner's report that labelled signalization at a critical point of entry onto that stretch of highway as «inadequate.»

Recently, the Supreme Court noted in Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Limited v Higgins Construction plc [2015] UKSC 38 4 All ER 482 at para [25] that that point decided in Sandwell was «not questioned» by the House of Lords in Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln CC [1999] 2 AC 349 when it had to decide whether the extended period provided by s 32 of the Act applied to restitutionary claims to recover payments made based on mistake.