Sentences with phrase «respondents in the case»

She was the only respondent in the case and the law firm has not been accused of any improper behaviour.

Charlotte also advises parents about arrangements for their children and represents applicants and respondents in cases involving allegations of domestic abuse.

I'll close this post with the view of Fran Ellers, a parent of two children in the Jefferson County Public School System (the other respondent in the case along with the Seattle school system).

The judge made valid the stance of the Counsel to Evans, Olukoya Ogungbeje that service on the first and second respondents in the case had been properly effected.

Abstract: This study is aimed to investigate proxy respondent's information usefulness in retrospective studies by comparing information obtained with a questionnaire (with a total of 171 items) from controls and their proxy respondents in a case - control study on Alzheimer's disease.

The National Education Association, the nation's largest union with more than 3 million members, and the California Teachers Association, are two of the union respondents in the case.

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.

Gordon has acted for local authorities and respondents in cases involving sexual abuse, including multigenerational sexual abuse; physical abuse, including non-accidental injuries, fabricated and induced illness and, shaking injuries; sudden infant death syndrome; medical treatment; secure accommodation; parents with mental illness; issues of mental capacity; immigration issues; wardship; adoption and forced marriages.

Callahan represented himself and the other respondents in the case.

Because the Royal Australian Mint is part of the Australian government, the respondent in the case is in fact the Commonwealth of Australia.

The Respondents in this case were seeking the extension of an exemption for the Insite facility under the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act (CDSA).

In addition, the respondents in that case made a number of subsequent efforts to have P.N. returned to either Hong Kong or the Philippines.

AG Szpunar found first that the respondent in the case should be Uber BV, as operators of the app in the EU, rather than Uber Spain, concluding also that Uber BV could take advantage of the provisions of the E-Commerce Directive to operate the app throughout the EU (at para. 79).

This will be an important issue in future cases though the lack of evidence brought by the Respondent in this case prevented it from being seriously addressed in this case.

The tribunal's power to order a respondent in a case to do something is usually dependent upon a finding that it has violated the Human Rights Code.

Put another way: could the respondent in this case prove the trust without recourse to the unlawful agreement.

The ruling is in favour of two Ogilvy Renault LLP (now Norton Rose Fulbright LLP) lawyers who were respondents in the case.

[32] In R.A.V. v. J.M.M., 2016 BCSC 1377, Madam Justice Arnold - Bailey performed a Contino analysis while considering the claimant's position that the respondent in that case pay the full table amount of child support, or, in the alternative, the set - off amount.

ARL intervened on behalf of the respondent in the case of Courtoreille v. Canada.

In D'Atri v. Gonzales, 2017 BCSC 1244, Madam Justice Young found that repeatedly breaching the terms of a separation agreement, relying upon incomplete financial disclosure in an application, forcing unnecessary applications, failing to comply with Court Orders, and making false accusations against the claimant's new partner were sufficient justification for an award of special costs against the respondent in that case.

Neither the petitioner nor the respondent in either case should sign any affidavits or sworn statements until and unless he or she is in front of a notary.

Choices don't apply to all respondents in every case, so responses won't equal 100 percent.