Sentences with phrase «present disputed claims»

It's OK to present disputed claims as if they were well - established and accepted scientific facts.

Not exact matches

Conway accused CNN of running its story based on anonymous sourcing, referring to CNN's coverage of classified documents alleging Russian operatives claimed to have compromising information about Trump that CNN reported were presented to the president - elect at the intelligence briefing, a point Conway disputed.

You and Velocity Micro agree that any claim, dispute, or controversy, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, and whether pre-existing, present or future, and including statutory, common law, intentional tort and equitable claims («Dispute») against Velocity Micro, its employees, agents, successors, assigns or affiliates arising from, in connection with, or relating to this Agreement, its interpretation, or the breach, termination, or validity thereof, the relationships which result from this Agreement (including, to the full extent permitted by applicable law, relationships with third parties who are not signatories to this Agreement), Velocity Micro's advertising or any related purchase SHALL BE RESOLVED, EXCLUSIVELY AND FINALLY, BY BINDING ARBITRATION ADMINISTERED BY THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION under its Code of Procedure then in dispute, or controversy, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, and whether pre-existing, present or future, and including statutory, common law, intentional tort and equitable claims («Dispute») against Velocity Micro, its employees, agents, successors, assigns or affiliates arising from, in connection with, or relating to this Agreement, its interpretation, or the breach, termination, or validity thereof, the relationships which result from this Agreement (including, to the full extent permitted by applicable law, relationships with third parties who are not signatories to this Agreement), Velocity Micro's advertising or any related purchase SHALL BE RESOLVED, EXCLUSIVELY AND FINALLY, BY BINDING ARBITRATION ADMINISTERED BY THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION under its Code of Procedure then in Dispute») against Velocity Micro, its employees, agents, successors, assigns or affiliates arising from, in connection with, or relating to this Agreement, its interpretation, or the breach, termination, or validity thereof, the relationships which result from this Agreement (including, to the full extent permitted by applicable law, relationships with third parties who are not signatories to this Agreement), Velocity Micro's advertising or any related purchase SHALL BE RESOLVED, EXCLUSIVELY AND FINALLY, BY BINDING ARBITRATION ADMINISTERED BY THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION under its Code of Procedure then in effect.

Except as expressly provided herein, any claim, dispute or controversy (whether based upon contract; tort, intentional or otherwise; constitution; statute; common law; or equity and whether pre-existing, present or future), including initial claims, counter-claims, cross-claims and thirdparty claims, arising from or relating to (i) the Card; (ii) any service relating to the Card; (iii) the marketing of the Card; (iv) this Cardholder Agreement, including the validity, enforceability, interpretation, scope, or application of the Agreement and this arbitration provision (except for the prohibition on class or other non-individual claims, which shall be for a court to decide); and (v) any other agreement or instrument relating to the Card or any such service («Claim») shall be decided, upon the election of you or the Bank (or Green Dot Corporation or the Bank's agents, employees, successors, representatives, affiliated companies, or assigns), by binding arbitration pursuant to this arbitration provision and the applicable rules and procedures of the arbitration administrator in effect at the time the Claim is fclaim, dispute or controversy (whether based upon contract; tort, intentional or otherwise; constitution; statute; common law; or equity and whether pre-existing, present or future), including initial claims, counter-claims, cross-claims and thirdparty claims, arising from or relating to (i) the Card; (ii) any service relating to the Card; (iii) the marketing of the Card; (iv) this Cardholder Agreement, including the validity, enforceability, interpretation, scope, or application of the Agreement and this arbitration provision (except for the prohibition on class or other non-individual claims, which shall be for a court to decide); and (v) any other agreement or instrument relating to the Card or any such service («Claim») shall be decided, upon the election of you or the Bank (or Green Dot Corporation or the Bank's agents, employees, successors, representatives, affiliated companies, or assigns), by binding arbitration pursuant to this arbitration provision and the applicable rules and procedures of the arbitration administrator in effect at the time the Claim is fClaim») shall be decided, upon the election of you or the Bank (or Green Dot Corporation or the Bank's agents, employees, successors, representatives, affiliated companies, or assigns), by binding arbitration pursuant to this arbitration provision and the applicable rules and procedures of the arbitration administrator in effect at the time the Claim is fClaim is filed.

Governing Law: Client and Mulcoy Travel agree that these terms and conditions, or any claim, dispute or controversy (whether in contract, tort, or otherwise, whether preexisting, present or future, and including statutory, common law and equitable claims) between client and Mulcoy Travel arising from or relating to these terms and conditions, interpretation thereof, or the breach, termination or validity thereof, the relationships which result from the tour, advertising by Mulcoy Travel, or any related purchase shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to conflicts of laws rules.

Binding Arbitration: ANY CLAIM, DISPUTE, OR CONTROVERSY (WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, OR OTHERWISE, WHETHER PREEXISTING, PRESENT OR FUTURE, AND INCLUDING STATUTORY, COMMON LAW, INTENTIONAL TORT AND EQUITABLE CLAIMS) BETWEEN CLIENT AND Mulcoy Travel, its respective agents, employees, principals, successors, assigns, or affiliates arising from or relating to these terms and conditions, interpretation thereof, or the breach, termination or validity thereof, the relationships which result from the tour (including, to the full extent permitted by applicable law, relationships with third parties who are not parties to these terms and conditions), Mulcoy Travel's advertising, or any related purchase SHALL BE RESOLVED EXCLUSIVELY AND FINALLY BY BINDING ARBITRATION ADMINISTERED BY THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION (AAA) under its Code of Procedure then in effect.

Stage 1 of the OC presents the greatest potential for disputes to be contained and prevented from crystallising into actual claims, and also has the potential to assist the parties to explore ADR processes and providers, thereby limiting those cases which reach the later OC stages.

Typically, employers and insurance companies have their attorneys present at a hearing to support their dispute to your claim.

Alex Sanchez of Franklin County Municipal Court, Small Claims and Dispute Resolution, presented at the National Association for Court Management — International Association for Court Administration Joint Educational Conference July 10, 2017 in Arlington Virginia.

Graduates of the course are all better equipped to advise on preparation of contract documents, to avoid the pitfalls of construction contracts, to negotiate through differences, to prepare and present claims, and to participate in the dispute resolution process.

Court Innovations presents Matterhorn with Alex Sanchez of Franklin County Municipal Court, Small Claims and Dispute Resolution at 11:15 this morning!

That process may include going to an arbitration of your claim, where each side presents arguments to an impartial third party and that person makes a ruling on the dispute.

It was not disputed that it was not «reasonably practicable» for the claimant to have presented her claim within the initial three - month period and so the issue was whether or not the delay by the claimant from the end of that three - month period until the date when the claim was presented was «reasonable» (The Employment Rights Act 1996, s 111 (2)-RRB-.

We are not among those who claim that ODR is a magical solution to all of Justice's woes, or even that it can be presented as a valid alternative to the courts for all types of disputes.

Therefore, the litigation faced by banking sector clients requires more than the resolution of technical disputes arising from day - to - day banking activities; it also requires the experience and flexibility of approach needed to handle the unusual challenges that financial claims frequently present.

That is, however, distinguishable from an error of categorisation (as in the present cases) unaccompanied by such false representations, even if the employee had claimed the advantages of self - employment before the dispute arose.