It directs Air Optima to cease and desist from further
violations of these statutory provisions and to pay a compromise civil penalty of $ 17,500 (US).
This consent order directs CMA to cease and desist from further
violations of these statutory provisions and to pay a compromise civil penalty.
It directs Capital Airways to ceasc and desist from hrther
violations of these statutory provisions and assesses the carrier a compromise civil penalty of $ 18,000 (US).
This order directs Private Air to cease and desist from further
violations of these statutory provisions and it assesses a compromise civil penalty of $ 25,000.
This decision may be welcomed for definitively making clear that there is room for an assessment on a case to case basis in determining the validity of a contract in
violation of a statutory provision.
If a contract is not only in
violation of a statutory provision (hop), but for that reason also in violation of public order (step), then the contract is void (jump).
The violation of a statutory provision normally warrants criminal prosecution or administrative sanctions.
Is a contract in
violation of a statutory provision valid or void?
Not exact matches
This order concerns
violations by Allegiant Air, LLC, (Allegiant)
of (1) the requirements
of 14 CFR Part 382 (Part 382) with respect to properly coding and recording its disability - related complaints in connection with required disability reporting to the Department
of Transportation (Department), as well as providing dispositive written responses to written consumer complaints alleging a
violation of Part 382, and related
statutory provisions, 49 U.S.C. § § 41702 and 41705; (2) the Department's full - fare advertising requirements, 14 CFR 399.84; and (3) 49 U.S.C. § 41712, which prohibits carriers from engaging in unfair and deceptive practices and unfair methods
of competition.
It directs Pascan to cease and desist from further
violations of the Department's rule and these
statutory provisions and assesses a compromise civil penalty
of $ 20,000 (US).
For example, in Colorado civil cases, some
of the more common grounds for an award
of attorneys» fees to a defending party are: (a) a two - sided contractual fee shifting term, (b) dismissal
of the case before filing an answer for failure to state a claim when tort claims were asserted, (c) a determination that the suit was groundless, frivolous or vexatious, (d)
violation of certain rules relating to disclosure
of information to the other party, (e) a
statutory fee shifting
provision in the case
of a claim based upon a statutorily created right which is present in some statutes but not others.
There was no identifiable power in the court, supported by a public policy, to supplement presently existing
statutory provisions to achieve what the prosecution want to achieve in
violation of Mrs Gibson's rights under Art 1
of Protocol 1
of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Ohio Supreme Court also concluded that the State had to establish scienter in order to prove a
violation of § 2907.323 (A)(3) based on the Ohio default statute specifying that recklessness applies when another
statutory provision lacks an intent specification.
«Labor Code statutes regulating meal and rest breaks, pay stubs, and minimum wages provide express
statutory remedies, including penalties for
violation of those statutes that are punitive in nature, that are available when an employer has violated those
provisions, and are exclusive remedy available for such
statutory violations absent evidence that
statutory remedy is inadequate.»
However, section 2107 (c) was an independent basis for sanctions, but the appellate court remanded for a re-examination
of fees under this
statutory provision given the reversal on the four alleged
violations.