Sentences with phrase «supreme court found»

The state supreme court found that the buyer's rep would be guilty under the Act only if he had deliberately misrepresented his qualifications during the transaction.

In a recent case, the Vermont Supreme Court found a real estate brokerage liable to a residential purchaser under the state's consumer protection act.

The Supreme Court found that the applicable standard of review was that the legislation was rationally related to a legitimate state interest.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court found that an employee's liability to an employer for ordinary negligence did not give rise to a prima facie duty of care.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on February 22, 2018, to hear an appeal of a case where the Arizona Supreme Court found that a lesbian woman should be recognized as the legal parent of the child she and her former wife conceived through artificial insemination during their marriage.

The U.S. Supreme Court found the government does have a legitimate interest in «ensuring public safety and order, promoting the free flow of traffic on streets and sidewalks, protecting property rights, and protecting a woman's freedom to seek pregnancy - related services,» and that the buffer zones at issue «clearly serve these interests.»

In one case, Justice Hidden of the NSW Supreme Court found confessional evidence from four Indigenous men was inadmissible as evidence in court because police failed to comply with the Custody Notification Service requirements under the legislation.

The case of NASA v Nelson garnered much attention as a unanimous ruling from the Supreme Court found that the federal agency's background checks are appropriate and do not represent a violation of privacy.

Section 4B1.2 (a)(2) of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines is identical to statutory language that the U.S. Supreme Court found to be unconstitutionally vague in Johnson v. United States.

But, the Texas Supreme Court found it did not matter whether Coach Monterrubio was motivated by homosexual desire or not.

The Supreme Court found that members can hold the leaders accountable,» says Glavin.

On the question of personal liability the Supreme Court found personal liability of two producers «since they deliberately and knowingly engaged in the infringement.»

Had the Supreme Court found in favour of Mrs Baker, the floodgates for tens of thousands of noise induced hearing loss claims would have opened.

The Supreme Court found that, in this case, the arbitrator's award was one of the possible, acceptable outcomes which were defensible in respect of the facts and law.

Recognizing that an individual appearing in public does retain an interest in controlling her or his information, the Supreme Court found that in the context of the picket line the restrictions of PIPA were to «impede the formulation and expression of views on matters of significant public interest and importance».

[24] But most of these mistakes were minor procedural errors, of the sort that the Supreme Court found to be inadequate to establish voter fraud in Etobicoke Centre.

Noting the broad restrictions under PIPA the Supreme Court found that «these broad restrictions are not justified because they are disproportionate to the benefits the legislation seeks to promote».

In the first significant judicial review of a decision of the BC Health Professions Review Board (the «HPRB»), the BC Supreme Court found that a registrar investigating a complaint and exercising a summary dismissal power under s. 32 (3) of the Health Professions Act (the «Act») was entitled to deference as to adequacy of the investigation in Moore v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, 2013 BCSC 2081.

COLUMBUS, Ohio (Legal Newsline)-- A strip club seems to have evaded a nearly $ 3 million verdict after the Ohio Supreme Court found the sole claim for a woman injured by a drunk - driving stripper would be under the state's Dram Shop Act.

In rejecting Birth Father's request for a de novo hearing on custody, the South Carolina Supreme Court found:

In ruling to not apply the clause, the Illinois Supreme Court found there was no mutuality of obligation since the daughter signed the agreement as the late mother's representative and not as a representative to the deceased mother's family who owns a valid wrongful death claim.

In Fairmont, the Supreme Court found that Fairmont's desire to maintain a tax - neutral position was not sufficiently planned or precise to justify the court exercising its equitable jurisdiction.

For example, in People v. Hall, 35 Cal.3 d 161, 672 P. 2d 854 (1983), the California Supreme Court found that there was no evidence to show that procedures implementing its version of this standard, imposed five years earlier, were burdensome for trial judges.

In Jean Coutu, the Supreme Court found that there was no error with the transaction as implemented, only unforeseen consequences that Jean Coutu was retroactively trying to avoid.

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.

However, it was the restriction of certain kinds of claims by fees that the Supreme Court found impeded access to justice, rather than the Type A and Type B distinction.

In a majority vote of eight to three this week, the Supreme Court found the government required an Act of Parliament to notify of its intention to leave the EU.

In upholding the Board's decision, the B.C. Supreme Court found that the HPRB's approach, which was premised on the complainant being able to fully participate in the proceedings before the HPRB, was not patently unreasonable.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court found to the contrary.

The B.C. Supreme Court found that manner of conception was a ground of discrimination analogous to those enumerated in section 15 (1) of the Charter.

The Supreme Court found that Napier broadly applied LIA preemption to any injury claim arising from locomotive equipment, and it therefore rejected all of the plaintiffs» arguments.

Because the Supreme Court found «the parties» intended agreement concerning alimony is inextricably connected to the agreed upon division of marital property,» it authorized reconsideration of the alimony agreement on remand too.

The Supreme Court found those requirements violated protection in the Charter against unreasonable search and seizure, and rights of security of the person.

In Gosselin v Halifax (Regional Municipality) Taxi Committee, 2000 NSJ No 31, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court found no breach of natural justice because the decision was unanimous and the applicant, having sat through the hearing and heard the decision, knew the identity of the decision - makers.

Applying this reasoning to the case at hand, the Supreme Court found that two of the pamphlets circulated by Whatcott (which criticized the acceptance of homosexuality in public schools) met the test for hate speech, and therefore justified fines and a cease and desist order against Whatcott.

In a lengthy but well - crafted judgment, the BC Supreme Court found that criminal laws preventing physicians from aiding or abetting persons to commit suicide were unconstitutional, as these provisions absolutely preventing patient access to physician - assisted death violated the s. 7 and...

On this basis, the Supreme Court found the criminal provisions surrounding prostitution to be in breach of Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but suspended the declaration of invalidity for one year, so as to allow Parliament an opportunity to regulate the area in a manner consistent with the constitution.

The Supreme Court found this negative obligation could be enforced using courts» general discretion under the Senior Courts Act 1981 (the «1981 Act»), even absent a current or prospective arbitration.

The Supreme Court found this failure shocking:

The Supreme Court found that the British Columbia Human Rights Code, which prohibits discrimination «regarding employment» against employees, applies when that discrimination has «a sufficient nexus with the employment context».

In 2005, the Wisconsin Supreme Court found caps to be unconstitutional because, among other things:

In the Oakes case itself, the Supreme Court found that the federal government failed to rationally connect Oakes» possession of a small amount of illegal drugs and money to the presumption that he was engaged in the crime of drug trafficking.

The Supreme Court found that there was no reversible error and affirmed the lower court's decision.

On April 10 2015, the BC Supreme Court found that the Downtown Ambassadors program engaged in discriminatory conduct against homeless people.

The claim against the prosecutor was dismissed; however, in a scathing 70 page decision Justice Punnett of the British Columbia Supreme Court found the CRA guilty of malicious prosecution and ordered the CRA to pay approximately $ 1.7 million in damages to the Samaroos.

The Supreme Court found that because the plaintiff was living at the fraternity, participating in traditions of the local fraternity, and subject to the mentorship of a «pledge father» from the local fraternity, that the pledge program was partially under control of the local fraternity.

Justice Punnett of the British Columbia Supreme Court found the CRA guilty of malicious prosecution and ordered the CRA to pay approximately $ 1.7 million in damages to the Samaroos.

The Supreme Court found that the defendant failed to take reasonable care for the safety of those, including the claimant by building too much slope into the ramp, not providing a guard or handrail on the outside, and not making some effort to enhance traction in the 6 years before the injury.

In ordering Gamino's license suspended for six months, the Supreme Court found that he:

In 2015, the Supreme Court found some minimum sentences violated the Charter and struck down the mandatory sentencing provisions.