Sentences with phrase «recent appeal hearing»

At a recent appeal hearing, the Ontario Court of Appeal determined that although Mason had voluntarily agreed to the non-compete clause, it was not enforceable for several reasons.

Not exact matches

Federal appeals courts in the states of Washington and Virginia are set to hear arguments this week on the legality of President Donald Trump's most recent travel ban, which sharply limits visitors and immigrants from eight countries, six of them Muslim - majority.

In doing so counsel relied on the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Windsor (City) v Canadian Transit Co 2016 SCC 54 (Windsor) which, serendipitously, was released the morning of the hearing of the appeal.

And we've already heard in recent weeks how Cuomo hopes to appeal to them.

(On the injunction issue, the Prothonotary's recent written directions as to scheduling and hearing Abbott's motion for a post trial injunction in May 2014 were recently «converted» to an Order and appealed by Janssen to be heard by Justice Hughes.)

For example, we ran date - limited searches to reveal discussion of keywords tagged to a recent Supreme Court of Canada appeal hearing.

The Privy Council is hearing an appeal by a Slovakian businessman, Mario Hoffman, against certain provisional findings made in a report by Sir Robin Auld (formerly a Court of Appeal judge in England) following his investigation into whether there was information that corruption may have taken place in recent years involving members of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) House of Assappeal by a Slovakian businessman, Mario Hoffman, against certain provisional findings made in a report by Sir Robin Auld (formerly a Court of Appeal judge in England) following his investigation into whether there was information that corruption may have taken place in recent years involving members of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) House of AssAppeal judge in England) following his investigation into whether there was information that corruption may have taken place in recent years involving members of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) House of Assembly.

This case follows on from the recent judgment in Sanum Investments Ltd v Government of the Lao People's Democratic Republic [2016] SGCA 57, in which the Singapore Court of Appeal found that an investor - State arbitral tribunal did have jurisdiction to hear claims against the Government of Laos.

That is the impact of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's recent refusal to hear an appeal from the state Superior Court of a ruling that gives...

Recent experience includes LCIA arbitrations about political risks insurance, major bank loans to Russian entities, and long - term coal supply agreements; an UNCITRAL arbitration about a coal contract price adjustment mechanism; LMAA arbitrations relating to shipbuilding contracts, charterparties, and bills of lading; a FOSFA Board Of Appeal hearing about a contaminated cargo of vegetable oil; and ICC arbitrations about a South American gas field consortium and an East African oil and gas exploration project.

The Supreme Court of Canada's recent dismissal of an application to hear an appeal of Benson Group further entrenches this established principle.

Recent cases include the high profile City bonus claims of Keen v Commerzbank and Horkulak v Cantor Fitzgerald International, acting for British Airways v Noble and Forde in the Court of Appeal (a case which affected some 9,000 employees), and the highly significant disability discrimination claim of O'Hanlon v HM Revenue and Customs which is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal next month.

A recent case heard before the Court of Appeals for Ontario highlights the importance of unambiguous language in termination clauses, as any ambiguity will render the clause unenforceable.

This question featured prominently at the recent Supreme Court of Canada hearing of Joseph Peter Paul Groia v. Law Society of Upper Canada on appeal from the Ontario Court of Aappeal from the Ontario Court of AppealAppeal.

While the overall volume of cases heard by the judges of the Court of Appeal has remained relatively stable in recent years, the temporary judicial vacancies experienced for significant parts of the year reduced the number of full - time judges available to hear these cases.

Senior judges have also made their voices heard, portraying the most recent cuts in strong language: the new President of the Supreme Court, Lady Justice Hale, described them as probably «a false economy»; Lady Justice Hallett, a senior Court of Appeal judge, said they had created a «huge burden» on judges, lawyers and litigants; while Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division, called them «shaming».

Examples of recent cases include the litigation in respect of the child refugees dispersed from the camp in Calais, Osborn in the Supreme Court on the requirements for Parole Board hearings, Sturnham in the Court of Appeal on damages for Article 5 breaches, the series of joined cases concerning reception conditions in Cyprus for asylum seekers, challenges to local authority taxi licensing policy, and challenges to the prison «book ban».

Simpson was reacting to two recent B.C. Supreme Court decisions that found the decisions by the Workers» Compensation Appeal Tribunal — the independent body that hears appeals of WorkSafeBC rulings — were «patently unreasonable» in denying the claims made by Cima and Erskine.

The need for this has been highlighted most poignantly in the recent case of Owens v Owens (2017) EWCA Civ 182, ironically heard by the Court of Appeal on Valentine's Day this year, in which a wife was refused the grant of decree nisi and her appeal dismissed on the basis that the contested allegations of her husband's unreasonable behaviour were at best fAppeal on Valentine's Day this year, in which a wife was refused the grant of decree nisi and her appeal dismissed on the basis that the contested allegations of her husband's unreasonable behaviour were at best fappeal dismissed on the basis that the contested allegations of her husband's unreasonable behaviour were at best flimsy.

Between the hearing of the Petition and the hearing of the appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada made its recent pronouncement on «access to justice» in Canada's civil litigation system in the case of Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2104 SCC 7, cited by the justices in this appeal decision.