Sentences with phrase «tribunal reached a decision»

The tribunal reached these decisions after interpreting Section 45.1 of the Code, which states that: «The Tribunal may dismiss an application, in whole or in part, in accordance with its rules if the Tribunal is of the opinion that another proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.»

Includes rules on how to appeal, how hearings are conducted, and how the tribunal reaches decisions.

Not exact matches

«In reaching its decision,» the five - member GMC tribunal ruled in January 2010, among dozens of proven findings, «the panel notes that the project reported in the Lancet paper was established with the purpose to investigate a postulated new syndrome and yet the Lancet paper did not describe this fact at all.

A German court reached this decision where the provisions of the 1996 English Arbitration Act agreed to by the parties granted discretion to the tribunal to schedule an oral hearing.908 A United States court held that a tribunal's decision of an issue of contract interpretation based solely on documentary evidence was not fundamentally unfair where the parties had not agreed on the applicable procedure.

In the Court's view, the decision to consolidate the claims was within the tribunal's discretion, and this decision was reached after a careful interpretation of the parties» contract.906 In another decision, a United States court held that there was no deviation from the rules of the American Arbitration Association agreed to by the parties where the tribunal had considered a belatedly submitted technical report, adding that «[a] rbitration proceedings are not constrained by formal rules of procedure or evidence.»

In reaching this decision, the High Court undertook a review of past Singapore case law and legal commentary on the nature and purpose of Article 34 (2)(a)(iii), ultimately deciding that «as a matter of policy, to hold that Art 34 (2)(a)(iii) does not apply, where no other limb under Art 34 (2) would be engaged, would allow an arbitral tribunal to immunize its awards against judicial scrutiny by delivering its conclusions on both jurisdiction and merits in a single award», which would have been an «unsatisfactory result».

While a tribunal's substantive decision - making under its home statute may survive a judicial review merely by being reasonable, a tribunal must still be correct about questions of general law, and must still reach decisions on a foundation of procedural fairness; legislatures do not authorize tribunals to decide matters through unjust processes (Dunsmuir at 128 - 129).

The High Court will have the power to substitute its own decision for the decision of a court or tribunal in certain circumstances: where the decision maker is a court or tribunal, the decision is quashed on the ground that there has been an error of law and if the High Court is satisfied that it is the only decision the court or tribunal could have reached.

Decisions of the tribunal may be appealed on a point of law to a Permanent Review Tribunal Under the New Zealand - Korea Free Trade Agreement, where the focus is also on cooperation and consultation to reach a mutually satisfactory outcome.

Clarity: Reasons must clearly identify the issues for decision and identify the tribunal's reasoning in reaching the decision on each issue.

It follows that when tribunal members come to write their decisions they must ensure that their reasons justify the result reached and disclose a transparent, intelligible line of reasoning which supports and explains the result.

: Reasons must clearly identify the issues for decision and identify the tribunal's reasoning in reaching the decision on each issue.

When determining if the tribunal has reached a decision that is «obviously wrong», an error must be apparent on the face of the award itself, such that it constitutes a «major intellectual aberration» (see HMV UK Ltd v Propinvest Friar Ltd Partnership [2012] 1 Lloyd's Rep 416).

A party challenging the substantive jurisdiction of the tribunal under section 67 is entitled to a complete rehearing, rather than a review of the decision reached by the tribunal (Azov Shipping Co v Baltic Shipping Co (No 1)[1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep 550; Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co v The Ministry of Religious Affairs, Government of Pakistan [2010] UKSC 46).

The matter was then taken to the High Court which decided that the methods by which the tribunal had reached its decisions were flawed.

All our mediators and business partners are committed to doing everything we can to ensure that our clients avoid the Courts and Tribunals and are supported to reach their own decisions and about their own circumstances in the most cost effective way least damaging way.

All our mediators and business partners are committed to doing everything we can to ensure that our clients avoid the Courts and Tribunals and are supported to reach their own decisions about their own circumstances in the most cost effective, least damaging way.

All our mediators and business partners are committed to doing everything we can to ensure that our clients avoid the Courts and Tribunals and are supported to reach their own decisions about their own circumstances in the most cost effective way least damaging way.