Sentences with phrase «protections apply in all cases»

These protections apply in all cases, whether it involves a veteran, a current member of the military, or someone seeking to join the military.

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 welIn 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 welin 2010 the court said that protection applies at a local level as well.

They should not only apply to state - citizen, but also to citizen - citizen relationships In the case of information provision there should be protection against information oligopolies organized by fellow - citizens.

In the North Wales case, because the baby's mother — his only legally recognised parent — had died, the child protection system was invoked and applied to the grieving father.

In some instances, joint protection techniques, using effective heat and cold treatments (like wheat packs or applying a cold compress), and even in severe cases utilising specialised splints or orthotic devices can all aid in supporting and aligning the affected jointIn some instances, joint protection techniques, using effective heat and cold treatments (like wheat packs or applying a cold compress), and even in severe cases utilising specialised splints or orthotic devices can all aid in supporting and aligning the affected jointin severe cases utilising specialised splints or orthotic devices can all aid in supporting and aligning the affected jointin supporting and aligning the affected joints.

Some states have pretty thorough (though still far from ideal) protections for dogs, while many others, sadly, have none at all — in which case the minimal federal law still applies.

Case in point: a bill recently signed into law by Governor Scott helps power companies — in particular FPL — build new high - voltage transmission lines by preempting local governments» ability to apply zoning and environmental protection laws to new power line development.

In its judgment of 26 February 2013, the CJEU responded to the first two questions in the affirmative, and clarified that Article 53 of the Charter only allows national authorities to apply higher standards of protection of fundamental rights where an EU legal act calls for national implementing measures, but not where, as in this case, the EU legal act harmonises the law between the Member StateIn its judgment of 26 February 2013, the CJEU responded to the first two questions in the affirmative, and clarified that Article 53 of the Charter only allows national authorities to apply higher standards of protection of fundamental rights where an EU legal act calls for national implementing measures, but not where, as in this case, the EU legal act harmonises the law between the Member Statein the affirmative, and clarified that Article 53 of the Charter only allows national authorities to apply higher standards of protection of fundamental rights where an EU legal act calls for national implementing measures, but not where, as in this case, the EU legal act harmonises the law between the Member Statein this case, the EU legal act harmonises the law between the Member States.

With regard to procedures concerning a Protection Order, the party may request the clerk of the court for the inspection or a copy of case records, the delivery of a transcript or an extract thereof, or the issuance of a certificate of matters concerning the case; provided, however, this shall not apply to the opposite party until the date for oral proceedings or a hearing in the presence of the opposite party with regard to the petition for the protection order is designated or until the protection order has been sent to the opposProtection Order, the party may request the clerk of the court for the inspection or a copy of case records, the delivery of a transcript or an extract thereof, or the issuance of a certificate of matters concerning the case; provided, however, this shall not apply to the opposite party until the date for oral proceedings or a hearing in the presence of the opposite party with regard to the petition for the protection order is designated or until the protection order has been sent to the opposprotection order is designated or until the protection order has been sent to the opposprotection order has been sent to the opposite party.

Article 19 With regard to procedures concerning a Protection Order, the party may request the clerk of the court for the inspection or a copy of case records, the delivery of a transcript or an extract thereof, or the issuance of a certificate of matters concerning the case; provided, however, this shall not apply to the opposite party until the date for oral proceedings or a hearing in the presence of the opposite party with regard to the petition for the protection order is designated or until the protection order has been sent to the opposProtection Order, the party may request the clerk of the court for the inspection or a copy of case records, the delivery of a transcript or an extract thereof, or the issuance of a certificate of matters concerning the case; provided, however, this shall not apply to the opposite party until the date for oral proceedings or a hearing in the presence of the opposite party with regard to the petition for the protection order is designated or until the protection order has been sent to the opposprotection order is designated or until the protection order has been sent to the opposprotection order has been sent to the opposite party.

(8) The provisions of paragraph 3 of the preceding Article shall apply mutatis mutandis to the cases set forth in paragraph 3 and paragraph 4 and when the appellate court has revoked a Protection Order.

The Alabama Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) applies in cases where a custody decision is made or which impact access to a child — including divorce, legal separation, neglect, dependency, guardianship, paternity, termination of parental rights, and protection from abuse concerning the legal custody, physical custody and visitation of children are decided.

Whole patent specification needs to be translated and in case it defines narrower scope of protection, it is the Polish text which is supposed to be applied.

Like the Netherlands Government, I think that Article 28 (3) of Directive 2004/38 does not apply to the case of Mr I., since his conduct and the way in which the acts were committed show that the true position is that he was not actually integrated and can not, therefore, benefit from the enhanced protection provided for in that provision.

«In the consumer's favour it is a big victory because the court found there is a limitation period and the transponder agreement he signed does not apply to a consumer as it's protected by the Consumer Protection Act, but when the court went on to find the limitation period in his case starts on the date he was placed in plate denial, then the limitation period has not run,» he sayIn the consumer's favour it is a big victory because the court found there is a limitation period and the transponder agreement he signed does not apply to a consumer as it's protected by the Consumer Protection Act, but when the court went on to find the limitation period in his case starts on the date he was placed in plate denial, then the limitation period has not run,» he sayin his case starts on the date he was placed in plate denial, then the limitation period has not run,» he sayin plate denial, then the limitation period has not run,» he says.

29 That said, where a court of a Member State is called upon to review whether fundamental rights are complied with by a national provision or measure which, in a situation where action of the Member States is not entirely determined by European Union law, implements the latter for the purposes of Article 51 (1) of the Charter, national authorities and courts remain free to apply national standards of protection of fundamental rights, provided that the level of protection provided for by the Charter, as interpreted by the Court, and the primacy, unity and effectiveness of European Union law are not thereby compromised (see, in relation to the latter aspect, Case C - 399 / 11 Melloni [2013] ECR I - 0000, paragraph 60).

This notion is fortified by the remarks made by the Court, seemingly as an afterthought, in paragraphs 48 and 49 of the judgment in the case of X and X, where the Court notes that a decision to allow third - country nationals to lodging applications for visas on the basis of the Visa Code in order to apply for international protection in the Member State to which they will travel would undermine the general structure of the Dublin system.

And thus, in the case at bar, the Defendants also have the protection of the implied undertaking, as far as it goes, which is not that far, because the deemed or implied undertaking does not apply to evidence disclosed in open court.

100] Allowing the Spanish authorities to apply a different standard in the present case «would have the effect, in particular, of seriously undermining the uniformity of the level of protection defined in Article 4a (1) of the Framework Decision and might hinder the execution of European arrest warrants issued for the purpose of executing judgments given in absentia.»

Within the scope of application of EU law national courts can already now apply higher standards of fundamental rights protection based on the ECHR and are obliged in cases of doubt to submit a question to the CJEU in the framework of a preliminary reference procedure.

[14] «Both judges of the Provincial Court (Family Division) and Children's Aid Societies pressed strongly to have the change in appeal procedures applied to child protection cases,» said Thomson.

In analyzing how European privacy and data protection rules apply to these different situations, how should we think about the example cases of e-discovery in the context of FCPIn analyzing how European privacy and data protection rules apply to these different situations, how should we think about the example cases of e-discovery in the context of FCPin the context of FCPA?

The latter applies to persons who «if returned to his or her country of origin, or in the case of a stateless person, to his or her country of former habitual residence, would face a real risk of suffering serious harm» and who are «unable, or, owing to such risk, unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country» (Article 2 (e)-RRB-.

Windsor, of course, did not expressly announce the level of scrutiny it applied to the equal protection claim at issue in that case, but an express declaration is not necessary.

It is ultimately a matter for the judge to apply the law in each individual case, but it would be helpful for both members of the legal profession and expert alike to be able to access court decisions in such difficult cases, including in the County Court and Court of Protection, to be able to enrich their understanding of the application of MCA 2005 in practice.

In a decision released earlier this month a strong panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal took a look at one aspect of the issue of what constitutes a «record,» in this case for the purposes of applying the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M. 5In a decision released earlier this month a strong panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal took a look at one aspect of the issue of what constitutes a «record,» in this case for the purposes of applying the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M. 5in this case for the purposes of applying the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M. 56.

The Court was careful to leave the door open by stating that there may be some cases where the Code may apply to partnerships, but that such a finding would only be justified in a situation where the powers, rights and protections normally associated with a partnership were greatly diminished.

In these cases, even if the protection against self - incrimination in section 13 of the Charter applies — which provides that «A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» — the SKCA held that prior false statements are admissible where the deceit is the substance of the offence, regardless of whether it was «incriminating evidence» or related to «perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» (Staranchuk SKCA at para 5In these cases, even if the protection against self - incrimination in section 13 of the Charter applies — which provides that «A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» — the SKCA held that prior false statements are admissible where the deceit is the substance of the offence, regardless of whether it was «incriminating evidence» or related to «perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» (Staranchuk SKCA at para 5in section 13 of the Charter applies — which provides that «A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» — the SKCA held that prior false statements are admissible where the deceit is the substance of the offence, regardless of whether it was «incriminating evidence» or related to «perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» (Staranchuk SKCA at para 5in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» — the SKCA held that prior false statements are admissible where the deceit is the substance of the offence, regardless of whether it was «incriminating evidence» or related to «perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» (Staranchuk SKCA at para 5in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» — the SKCA held that prior false statements are admissible where the deceit is the substance of the offence, regardless of whether it was «incriminating evidence» or related to «perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» (Staranchuk SKCA at para 5in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» — the SKCA held that prior false statements are admissible where the deceit is the substance of the offence, regardless of whether it was «incriminating evidence» or related to «perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence» (Staranchuk SKCA at para 5).

This protection does not apply, however, in cases where the victim was a child younger than 6 years of age, or if the attack was proximately caused by a negligent act or omission on the part of the dog owner.

In addition, the court applied its own older decision in Tank Lining Corp. v. Dunlop Industrial Ltd. (1982), where it held that in all cases a party's entitlement to enforce a restrictive covenant was based on the protection of a legitimate or proprietary interest, such as the goodwill of a business in a commercial context or the confidential information unique to an employmenIn addition, the court applied its own older decision in Tank Lining Corp. v. Dunlop Industrial Ltd. (1982), where it held that in all cases a party's entitlement to enforce a restrictive covenant was based on the protection of a legitimate or proprietary interest, such as the goodwill of a business in a commercial context or the confidential information unique to an employmenin Tank Lining Corp. v. Dunlop Industrial Ltd. (1982), where it held that in all cases a party's entitlement to enforce a restrictive covenant was based on the protection of a legitimate or proprietary interest, such as the goodwill of a business in a commercial context or the confidential information unique to an employmenin all cases a party's entitlement to enforce a restrictive covenant was based on the protection of a legitimate or proprietary interest, such as the goodwill of a business in a commercial context or the confidential information unique to an employmenin a commercial context or the confidential information unique to an employment.

Recent case law has confirmed that the same principles and processes should apply to review and renewal hearings for authorisations for DoL in the Inherent Jurisdiction of the High Court as to the Court of Protection.

It is unclear whether provincial domestic violence legislation such as Alberta's Protection Against Family Violence Act, RSA 2000, c P - 27 (PAFVA) can apply on First Nations reserves, as there is currently no case law in this area.

An Ottawa court case decided in January that the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF - 44R) did apply to cover a young man (not named in the policy) who received serious injuries in an accident -LSB-...]

In cases such as Pham, where citizenship was at issue, it is quite possible that an applicant will be able to claim EU - law rights (to which the doctrine of proportionality applies), Convention rights (to which proportionality also applies, subject to the additional limitation of the «margin of appreciation» at the European level and, perhaps, to a «discretionary area of judgment» domestically [2]-RRB- and the protection of the common law (certainly Wednesbury unreasonableness and, in some circumstances, the principle of legality [3]-RRBIn cases such as Pham, where citizenship was at issue, it is quite possible that an applicant will be able to claim EU - law rights (to which the doctrine of proportionality applies), Convention rights (to which proportionality also applies, subject to the additional limitation of the «margin of appreciation» at the European level and, perhaps, to a «discretionary area of judgment» domestically [2]-RRB- and the protection of the common law (certainly Wednesbury unreasonableness and, in some circumstances, the principle of legality [3]-RRBin some circumstances, the principle of legality [3]-RRB-.

We apply more extensive procedural requirements to law enforcement disclosures than to disclosures for health oversight because we believe that law enforcement investigations more often involve situations in which the individual is the subject of the investigation (and thus could suffer adverse consequences), and we believe that it is appropriate to provide greater protection to individuals in such cases.

The scope of the statutory privilege would apply in cases where the trademark agent is seeking to advise on «any matter» in respect of «the protection of a trade - mark, geographical indication or mark referred to in paragraph 9 (1)(e), (i), (i. 1), (i. 3), (n) or (n. 1)».

The scope of the statutory privilege would apply in cases where the patent agent is seeking to advise on «any matter» in respect of «the protection of an invention».

In each of the above areas — entry restrictions, advertising and paralegals — the courts did ultimately inspire, if not dictate, significant change: citizenship requirements were ultimately deemed invalid by the Supreme Court of Canada in Andrews, advertising restrictions were liberalized in the context of a series of post-Charter cases finding freedom of expression protections applied to commercial speech and professional advertising, and paralegal regulation has been reviewed in provinces across Canada following the courts» attention to the issuIn each of the above areas — entry restrictions, advertising and paralegals — the courts did ultimately inspire, if not dictate, significant change: citizenship requirements were ultimately deemed invalid by the Supreme Court of Canada in Andrews, advertising restrictions were liberalized in the context of a series of post-Charter cases finding freedom of expression protections applied to commercial speech and professional advertising, and paralegal regulation has been reviewed in provinces across Canada following the courts» attention to the issuin Andrews, advertising restrictions were liberalized in the context of a series of post-Charter cases finding freedom of expression protections applied to commercial speech and professional advertising, and paralegal regulation has been reviewed in provinces across Canada following the courts» attention to the issuin the context of a series of post-Charter cases finding freedom of expression protections applied to commercial speech and professional advertising, and paralegal regulation has been reviewed in provinces across Canada following the courts» attention to the issuin provinces across Canada following the courts» attention to the issue.

It gives a lot more protection than the rule that laws have to be religiously neutral, which is why you have cases like Hobby Lobby (in which a federal law requiring employers to pay for contraception, though religiously neutral and of general applicability, was ruled to not apply to companies with religious objections to contraception).

The decision of the House of Lords in Majrowski v Guy's & st Thomas» NHS Trust [2006] IRLR 695, [2006] UKHL 34 — applying the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (PHA 1997) to the employment area in «stress» cases — has been much discussed and has often seemed to be fairly open - ended (especially as there is no detailed definition of «harassment» in PHA 1997).

However, the ECJ held, in Weltimmo (Case C - 230 / 14), that data protection legislation may be applied to a foreign company.

Maintaining express consent should remain in the legislation and be applied to cases where one party is sharing a contact's email address with another party (found in section 5 of the Electronic Commerce Protection Regulations).

This means that an applicant can have his or her protection in place within just a few days of applying for it — and in some cases, they may even have their policy issued the very same day.

The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the civil aspects of international child abduction («the 1980 Hague Convention») and the Hague Convention (1996) on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition, enforcement and cooperation in respect of parental responsibility and measures for the protection of children continue to apply in cases where the 2003 Regulation does not.

That in the Coppin case the NNTT had no jurisdiction to hear an application for determination of native title before the government complied with its obligation to negotiate in good faith, undermined any protection that the provisions were originally intended to apply.

From addressing individual cases of discrimination, to engaging with government around policy, the Commission's task is both to apply those rights that are currently recognised in our laws; and to aspire for greater recognition and protection of those that are not.

In extreme cases, state departments can apply to a court for a care and protection order.