Sentences with phrase «valid agreement»

They expressed the view that it will normally be inexpedient to grant interim relief in aid of an ICSID arbitration, because the ICSID rules exclude the possibility of such relief unless the parties have agreed otherwise and those rules form part of the arbitration agreement to which the court will give effect as they would any other valid agreement between the parties to a dispute.

«Because there was never a valid agreement and thus, no agreement to arbitrate,» the lawsuit concludes, «any subsequent order obtained by Mr. Cohen and / or Mr. Trump in arbitration is of no consequence or effect.»

«This was a valid agreement between the CSEA union and Nassau County and has already been implemented.

«We feel confident that we have a valid agreement.

The issue for me is that some judges say: «defendant must prove that there is a valid agreement but, if he has done so, it is on the claimant to prove that the agreement is null and void»

Any valid agreement of the parties.12.

In the absence of that, it could not be said that it was a valid agreement.

When a couple makes a valid agreement specifying that their earnings will remain separate property after marriage, this agreement generally binds creditors in Arizona, so long as a the Prenuptial Agreement or an Abstract of the Prenuptial Agreement is recorded in the County Recorder's Office.

A tenant's declaration or statutory declaration made since the 2004 reforms will not produce a valid agreement to contract out if the process relates to a lease that does not create a term certain.

Wisconsin contract laws set several requirements for a valid agreement, and the spouses must meet these requirements when writing their stipulation.

However, before the court may approve the settlement and finalize the divorce, the court must confirm that the settlement meets the state law requirements for a valid agreement.

Since the court had already determined that a valid agreement existed between the parties, the court ruled that Crowe was entitled to judgment on both of these counts.

The trial court ruled that there was not a valid agreement between the Brokerage and the Buyers, but the Brokerage was entitled to recover $ 20,000 under a quantum meruit theory.

The court agreed with the lower courts, finding that the listing agreement contained enough terms (commission amount, authorization to sell) to make it a valid agreement.

Deshields did not attend the closing, and the next day the Salesperson claimed that there was never a valid agreement between the parties because the crossed out language regarding the earnest money was never initialed by both parties.