Sentences with phrase «required under the court order»

In 2007 then Governor Eliot Spitzer and the legislature implemented a four - year plan to phase in the funding required under the court order.

Eliot Spitzer and the legislature implemented a four - year plan to phase in the funding required under the court order.

Not exact matches

We may need to disclose personal information to meet legal or regulatory requirements, such as under a court order or to a government institution if required or authorized by law.

Courts in Rhode Island rarely require abusers to turn in their firearms, even when orders prohibit them from possessing firearms under federal law and there is evidence they pose a lethal risk to victims, according to research presented today at the American Public Health Association's 2016 Annual Meeting and Expo in Denver.

CCSA requests that the court order LAUSD to re-calculate the number of classrooms allocated to charter schools under Prop. 39 using the method required by the regulations.

(b) If the respondent named in a charge filed under section 706 fails or refuses to comply with a demand of the Commission for permission to examine or to copy evidence in conformity with the provisions of section 709 (a), or if any person required to comply with the provisions of section 709 (c) or (d) fails or refuses to do so, or if any person fails or refuses to comply with a demand by the Commission to give testimony under oath, the United States district court for the district in which such person is found, resides, or transacts business, shall, upon application of the Commission, have jurisdiction to issue to such person an order requiring him to comply with the provisions of section 709 (c) or (d) or to comply with the demand of the Commission, but the attendance of a witness may not be required outside the State where he is found, resides, or transacts business and the production of evidence may not be required outside the State where such evidence is kept.

Neither the Contractor nor its employees shall testify on a matter related to work performed or information provided under this contract, either voluntarily or pursuant to a request, in any judicial or administrative proceeding unless approved, in advance, by the Contracting Officer or required by a judge in a final court order.

The procedure for the person to follow in order to pay the civil penalty, to contest the citation, or to appear in court as required under subsection (6).

The Humane Society says the Agriculture Department is required to make its inspection records at animal research facilities public under a court order.

Earlier this week UVA — as required by a court order — delivered records relating to Climategate «Hockey Stick» chart creator Michael Mann that ATI asked for in January under a Freedom of -LSB-...]

The person appointed under the Power of Attorney will then use the Power wherever required (in a Notary, a Court, a bank etc.) and will be required to present it to that entity in order to confirm they are legally acting on your behalf.

[81] The court confirmed that under HPA s. 35, an inquiry committee should be satisfied of a prima facie case, meaning a case for allegations which, if believed, is sufficient to justify a verdict «in the absence of an answer», and that the public requires protection through an interim order.

(a) any power that a court may exercise under rule 27 (requiring financial information) other than a power to order a person imprisoned under subrule 27 (6), (20) or (21); and

If no payment is required by paragraph 1, an additional payment to the insured person's dependants and the persons, other than a former spouse of the insured person, to whom the insured person had an obligation at the time of the accident to provide support under a domestic contract or court order, to be divided equally among the persons entitled, of,

«An employer shall not deduct from an employee's wages or accept payment from an employee unless: (a) the deduction or payment is required or authorised under a statutory provision or the employee's contract of employment; (b) the employee has previously agreed in writing to the deduction or payment; (c) the deduction or payment is a reimbursement for an overpayment of wages or expenses; or (d) the deduction or payment has been ordered by the Court.»

One of the remedies available under equity is an injunction: a court order requiring (or prohibiting) something to be done (or not be done) by someone.

The testator may be required, by court order or under a domestic contract, to pay support to a dependent ex-spouse or child.

On the other hand, a person under investigation has the obligation to produce materials (even if subject to data privacy, bank secrecy and other data protection laws) if required by CVM or a valid court order.

In claims brought under section 8, the Court has a discretion whether to award a possession order but also has the power to make an order requiring payment of any arrears outstanding, if appropriate, and also costs.

And it has come under more recent scrutiny in an application involving Apple, Inc. before Magistrate Judge James Orenstein of the United States District Court, Eastern District of New York, in In Re Order Requiring Apple, Inc..

If no payment is required by paragraph 1, an additional payment to the insured person's dependants and the persons, other than a former spouse of the insured person, to whom the insured person had an obligation at the time of the accident to provide support under a domestic contract or court order, to be divided equally among the persons entitled, in an amount equal to $ 25,000 if the accident occurred before October 1, 2003 or, if the accident occurred on or after October 1, 2003,

Finally, the Court stressed that the «potential competition» which is protected under Article 101 includes all the administrative and commercial steps required in order to prepare for entry to the market (para 171).

That power belongs to the Attorney General of Ontario (the AG), which is statutorily authorized under the Civil Remedies Act, 2001 (the Act) to commence proceedings before the Ontario Superior Court for an order requiring a wrongdoer to forfeit property in Ontario to the Crown in right of Ontario where the court finds that the property is the «proceeds of unlawful activity&raCourt for an order requiring a wrongdoer to forfeit property in Ontario to the Crown in right of Ontario where the court finds that the property is the «proceeds of unlawful activity&racourt finds that the property is the «proceeds of unlawful activity».

Under RDC 9.54, «where a claim form is to be served out of the DIFC or Dubai, it may be served by any method permitted by the law of the place in which it is to be served» whilst under RDC 9.55, «nothing in these Rules or in any Court order shall authorise or require any person to do anything in the place where the claim form is to be served which is against the law of that place.&rUnder RDC 9.54, «where a claim form is to be served out of the DIFC or Dubai, it may be served by any method permitted by the law of the place in which it is to be served» whilst under RDC 9.55, «nothing in these Rules or in any Court order shall authorise or require any person to do anything in the place where the claim form is to be served which is against the law of that place.&runder RDC 9.55, «nothing in these Rules or in any Court order shall authorise or require any person to do anything in the place where the claim form is to be served which is against the law of that place.»

In the United Kingdom High Court (Administrative) decision of DD v Secretary of State for Home Department [2014](«DD») Ouseley J was required to consider, on a preliminary basis, whether the imposition of a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure («TPIM»)(the successor of control orders) had violated the appellant's right to freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment under article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights («ECHR»).

115 Where a person is required to give security in respect of a proceeding in a court, a bond of an insurer licensed under the Insurance Act to write surety and fidelity insurance is sufficient, unless the court orders otherwise.

Pursuant to subsection 231.7 (1) of the Act, the Minister may apply for a court order requiring compliance in circumstances where the taxpayer was required to provide access, assistance, information or documents under section 231.1 and did not do so.

The Court was dismissive of the argument that a contractual nexus was required in order to justify a third party costs order under Section 51 (3) of the Senior Courts Act.

(2) Georgia courts have enforced a provision in a Tennessee UM policy that required actual physical contact with a phantom vehicle in order to recover under the policy, even though Georgia law allows for an exception to this requirement.

Where there is a significant dispute between professionals and parents regarding the administration of certain medications, the authorisation of the Court may be required under the inherent jurisdiction and a Local Authority could not rely on its parental responsibility provided by the care order for consent.

Notwithstanding a judgment of non-return pursuant to Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention, any subsequent judgment which requires the return of the child issued by a court having jurisdiction under this Regulation shall be enforceable in accordance with Section 4 of Chapter III below in order to secure the return of the child.

In addition to the above, the court can make an order under section 42 requiring a party to comply with a peremptory order made by the tribunal.

8.3 Under what circumstances, if any, can a national court assist arbitral proceedings by ordering disclosure / discovery or requiring the attendance of witnesses?

The regulations: - Provide that where a magistrates» court sends a defendant for trial at the Crown Court under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s 51 the proceedings in the magistrates» court are preliminary to the proceedings in the Crown Court, so that no representation order is required for the proceedings in the magistrates» court (recourt sends a defendant for trial at the Crown Court under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s 51 the proceedings in the magistrates» court are preliminary to the proceedings in the Crown Court, so that no representation order is required for the proceedings in the magistrates» court (reCourt under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s 51 the proceedings in the magistrates» court are preliminary to the proceedings in the Crown Court, so that no representation order is required for the proceedings in the magistrates» court (recourt are preliminary to the proceedings in the Crown Court, so that no representation order is required for the proceedings in the magistrates» court (reCourt, so that no representation order is required for the proceedings in the magistrates» court (recourt (reg 3).

However, whereas TCEA 2007 is simply silent on prevention of access, the Courts Act 2003, under which the 2015 Order is made, actively requires the Lord Chancellor to «have regard to the principle that access to the courts must not be denied» (s 92 (3)-RRB- when putting a fees regime in Courts Act 2003, under which the 2015 Order is made, actively requires the Lord Chancellor to «have regard to the principle that access to the courts must not be denied» (s 92 (3)-RRB- when putting a fees regime in courts must not be denied» (s 92 (3)-RRB- when putting a fees regime in place.

The court rejected Stanley's argument, that in making her order for support, the trial judge erred by failing to consider the factors she was required to consider under the Divorce Act or by considering only certain factors in isolation.

The Supreme Court found that the pith and substance of the Guidelines Order was to require the decision - maker to gather information about environmental impacts within all the heads of power under Federal jurisdiction before making that decision about navigation.

(2) If the court makes an order under subsection (1), the court may allocate among the parties, or require one party alone to pay, the fees relating to the family dispute resolution, counselling, services or programs.

But under Ontario rules, 57.07 (1) «Where a solicitor for a party has caused costs to be incurred without reasonable cause or to be wasted by undue delay, negligence or other default, the court may make an order... requiring the solicitor personally to pay the costs of any party.»

The second is that where the court makes an express order requiring the parent with care to comply with contact arrangements, and that order is breached, then, in the interests of consistency, the judge must support the order by considering enforcement, either under the enforcement provisions in section 11J of the 1989 Child Act or by contempt proceedings.

Comment: One commenter asked that the final regulation clarify that a court order is not required when disclosure would otherwise be permitted under the rule.

Where a disclosure made pursuant to this paragraph is required by law, such as in the case of an order from a court or administrative tribunal, the minimum necessary requirements in § 164.514 (d) do not apply to disclosures made under this paragraph.

Required by law includes, but is not limited to, court orders and court - ordered warrants; subpoenas or summons issued by a court, grand jury, a governmental or tribal inspector general, or an administrative body authorized to require the production of information; a civil or an authorized investigative demand; Medicare conditions of participation with respect to health care providers participating in the program; and statutes or regulations that require the production of information, including statutes or regulations that require such information if payment is sought under a government program providing public benefits.

s 213 (3) would require the court to either order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay it to the applicant (s 213 (3)(a)-RRB- or order that the person pay the deposit into the designated account held by the scheme administrator under an authorised custodial scheme (s 213 (3)(b)-RRB- within 14 days.

In the court's view, where, as here: (1) the Director under the OBCA issues a certificate pursuant to a rectification order; (2) the appellant could reasonably have sought a stay of the rectification order pending appeal; (3) the court is not satisfied that no third party acted, directly or indirectly, in reliance on the certificate issued pursuant to the rectification order and would not be prejudiced by its revocation; and (4) there are no special circumstances which justify exercising the power to cancel the certificate, thereby undermining certainty in a court - approved corporate fundamental change, the principle in Norcan requires the court to decline to exercise its authority to order the revocation of that certificate or otherwise unwind the court - approved corporate fundamental change.

On May 1, 2017, there was a significant change to paragraph 57 of the Consolidated Practice Direction for Civil Actions, Applications, Motions and Procedural Matters in the Toronto Region: For all Toronto civil actions subject to Mandatory Mediation under Rule 24.1, Court staff now require a new form of Certificate to be filed in order to set an action down for trial.

The Federal Court of Canada released a landmark decision finding that the court has the jurisdiction to make an extra-territorial order with world - wide effects against a foreign resident requiring the foreign person to remove documents containing personal information about a Canadian citizen that violates the person's rights under Canada's privacy law, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPCourt of Canada released a landmark decision finding that the court has the jurisdiction to make an extra-territorial order with world - wide effects against a foreign resident requiring the foreign person to remove documents containing personal information about a Canadian citizen that violates the person's rights under Canada's privacy law, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPcourt has the jurisdiction to make an extra-territorial order with world - wide effects against a foreign resident requiring the foreign person to remove documents containing personal information about a Canadian citizen that violates the person's rights under Canada's privacy law, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).

(6) The Supreme Court may by order reduce the amount an appellant is required to deposit under this section, and, if the amount is reduced, the appellant must serve notice of the order on the other parties to the appeal.

[57][58] Unless there is an actual trial or judgment, if there is only pre-trial motion practice such as motions to dismiss, attorney fee shifting can only be awarded under FRCP Rule 11 and it requires that the opposing party file a Motion for Sanctions and that the court issue an order identifying the sanctioned conduct and the basis for the sanction.

We may, as necessary, disclose this information or any other information that may identify you to state and local authorities or law enforcement as required under law or by court order.