Not exact matches
I am
involved right now
in a
case to which the
respondent Law Society of BC was easily able to secure a court order sealing the record and denying the public access to any hearings, though it is not clear to us on what basis that order is supposedly justified.
● the applicant has no private interest
in the outcome of the
case; ● having regard to the financial resources of the applicant and the
respondent (s) and to the amount of costs that are likely to be
involved it is fair and just to make the order;
The
case of Whiteley v. Osprey Media Publishing Inc. and Sun Media Corporation
involved an allegation from a lawyer that the
respondents (Osprey Media Publishing Inc., Sun Media Corporation, which is owned by the Quebecor media chain, and the Ontario Human Rights Commission) discriminated against him on the basis of place of origin
in goods, services or facilities.
Further, while a substantial majority of all
respondents said that added challenges arise
in cases involving a self - represented litigant, Albertans were more likely to say that these challenges always or usually arise than
respondents from the rest of Canada.
She has expertise
in acting for both Applicants and
Respondents in cases concerning the Hague Convention, and regularly represents parties
in applications made under the Inherent Jurisdiction of the High Court / Wardship and child abduction
cases involving Non Hague Convention countries.
Counsel for
respondent in LCIA arbitration
case no. 8081
involving fraudulent inducement of bank loan
Co-Counsel for
respondent in ICC arbitration
case no. 10803 / ACS
involving dispute over design rights for military bridges
One can understand the frustration of judges when bundles are badly prepared / late / missing, but save
in the most affluent of
cases the preparation of bundles will often be onerous and time - consuming particularly
in cases involving litigants
in person (where the
respondent, if legally represented, now has to prepare the bundle if the applicant is unrepresented).
I was
involved (
respondent)
in a
case where the factual documentary evidence was incontrovertible, public record, and it...
The response to the notice of arbitration may also include: (a) Any plea that an arbitral tribunal to be constituted under these Rules lacks jurisdiction; (b) A proposal for the appointment of a sole arbitrator referred to
in article 8, paragraph 1; (c) Notification of the designation of an arbitrator referred to
in articles 9 or 10; (d) A brief description of counterclaims or claims for the purpose of a set - off, if any, including where relevant, an indication of the amounts
involved, and the relief or remedy sought; (e) A notice of arbitration
in accordance with article 3
in case the
respondent formulates a claim against a party to the arbitration agreement other than the claimant.
In the case of United First Partners Research v Carreras [2018] EWCA 323 the Claimant had worked at the Respondent company for 10 months before being involved in a cycling accident in 2012 which left him seriously affected both mentally and physically, amounting to a disability under the Equality Ac
In the
case of United First Partners Research v Carreras [2018] EWCA 323 the Claimant had worked at the
Respondent company for 10 months before being
involved in a cycling accident in 2012 which left him seriously affected both mentally and physically, amounting to a disability under the Equality Ac
in a cycling accident
in 2012 which left him seriously affected both mentally and physically, amounting to a disability under the Equality Ac
in 2012 which left him seriously affected both mentally and physically, amounting to a disability under the Equality Act.
He is an experienced Employment Tribunal Advocate and has appeared
in numerous
cases throughout England, Wales and Scotland, including complex discrimination claims, whistleblowing claims and claims
involving multiple Claimants and
Respondents.
The relevant witness
in this
case was a director of a sister company of the
respondent and had been
involved in negotiations with the claimant.
Enmax Energy Corp. v. TransAlta Generation Partnership 2015 ABCA 383 Arbitration — Estoppel Summary: The appellant appealed a chambers judge's decision where he held that the parties to an arbitration were not bound by a prior arbitration award
involving the same parties, that a party (
in this
case, the
respondent) was not estopped from taking certain positions
in the current arbitration as a result of the prior arbitration decision, and that the doctrines of res judicata and issue estoppel did not apply to arbitration awards.
The Committee, having taken note of the explanations provided by the delegation, invites the State party to envisage regulating the burden of proof
in civil proceedings
involving racial discrimination so that once an alleged victim has established a prima facie
case that he or she has been a victim of such discrimination, it shall be for the
respondent to provide evidence of an objective and reasonable justification for differential treatment.
In 57 % of cases, the ICC or solution broker were integrally involved in the development of the SRA (although survey respondents generally identified this participation as by «ICC staff» rather than by «solution brokers»); a
In 57 % of
cases, the ICC or solution broker were integrally
involved in the development of the SRA (although survey respondents generally identified this participation as by «ICC staff» rather than by «solution brokers»); a
in the development of the SRA (although survey
respondents generally identified this participation as by «ICC staff» rather than by «solution brokers»); and
60 % of
respondents said they worked with the systems
involved with their clients including: social services, extended families, foster parents, biological parents (if
in foster care), friends, school, doctors, community,
in most of their
cases.
In our survey, the respondents reported that an average of 46 % of their cases involve some form of equal parenting time («joint physical custody,» «shared custody,» or «shared residence,» in which the children spend at least 40 % of their time with each parent
In our survey, the
respondents reported that an average of 46 % of their
cases involve some form of equal parenting time («joint physical custody,» «shared custody,» or «shared residence,»
in which the children spend at least 40 % of their time with each parent
in which the children spend at least 40 % of their time with each parent).
(b) A person shall automatically be disqualified as a member of a tribunal
in any
case in which the person is (1) related by blood or marriage to either complainant or
respondent; (2) an employer, partner, employee, or
in any way associated
in business with either complainant or
respondent; (3) a party to the hearing, or a party or a witness
in any other pending
case involving a party to this hearing; or (4) is objected to by a party as provided
in Part Seven, Section 27 (f).