Sentences with phrase «where judgments of that court»

Not exact matches

However, he praised the U.K.'s legal system, saying «we have the good fortune to live in a country where everyone... even government is subject to the rule of law, so the government will comply with the judgment of the court and do all that is necessary to implement it.»

«It also disregarded former decisions of the court concerning Iranian converts, where judgments were issued in favor of the converts.»

«It is dangerously unbecoming of a Cabinet minister to misrepresent court judgments - especially where her own department conceded this case on appeal.»

While suggesting plethora of statistics and judicial decisions especially a 2014 English Court of Appeal judgment where it was stated that «cases take up to a generation to be resolved in Nigeria occasioned by catastrophic delays,» Osinbajo said stakeholders must now resolve to address the issue of delay once and for all in the collective interest of all.

J1 / 29/2015 where the Supreme Court stated at page 12 of its judgment that:

Makarfi and members of his team are currently at the Supreme Court, where they filed an appeal against the judgment of a Federal High Court, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, which affirmed Sheriff as the national chairman of the troubled party.

Makarfi and his faction were said to be planning to implement the report if they get favourable judgment at the Supreme Court, where they had filed an appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment, which ruled that Sheriff remained the chairman of the former ruling party.

Copies of eviction judgments can be found at the court where they were filed.

This same section of your credit report is where court cases involving creditor judgments are listed.

If a civil judgment is entered in your name for your imposter's actions, contact the court where the judgment was entered and report that you are a victim of identity theft.

First, the Court mentions the ECtHR judgment in Sejdovic v. Italy (§ 82 et seq.), where the Grand Chamber explained that there is no violation of Article 6 ECHR if the person freely and unequivocally waives the right to be physically present at the hearing and is defended by counsel at trial.

In a short judgment (concerned with the extent to which courts were bound by Privy Council decisions) Lord Neuberger said: «In a common law system, where the law is in some areas made, and the law is in virtually all areas developed, by judges, the doctrine of precedent, or as it is sometimes known stare decisis, is fundamental.

This judgment followed on from the well - known decision of Mr Justice Birss in Unwired Planet v Huawei where he determined that the English High Court had jurisdiction to determine portfolio FRAND on a global basis and could grant a so called FRAND injunction against a defendant if it chose not to enter into the licence on the terms determined by the Court.

R (MILLER) V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION Gordon Nardell QC andTom Leary examine the Supreme Court's judgment in Miller [2017] UKSC 5 and ask where it leaves the Crown's prerogative power to conduct foreign affairs Forget the experts.With William Hill offering odds of 5/2 (a 28 % chance) on the Government winning.OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION Gordon Nardell QC andTom Leary examine the Supreme Court's judgment in Miller [2017] UKSC 5 and ask where it leaves the Crown's prerogative power to conduct foreign affairs Forget the experts.With William Hill offering odds of 5/2 (a 28 % chance) on the Government winning.of 5/2 (a 28 % chance) on the Government winning...

The State's courts have shown no reluctance to strike punitive damage awards in cases where punitive liability is not established, so that defendant qualifies for judgment on that issue as a matter of law.

The Court held that the revelation of character cases can be roughly divided into three categories: i) where misconduct is extremely serious, sometimes bordering on criminal acts (e.g. theft or fraud), just cause for termination will usually exist; ii) where conduct reveals deceit, misrepresentation or misleading of employers, cause will likely be found; and iii) where there are errors in judgment or a failure to follow rules, it can not automatically be said that the employee was dishonest for the purposes of justifying summary dismissal.

(3) In the case where an immediate appeal against a ruling has been lodged, and only when there is prima facie evidence showing that there are circumstances that will cause the revocation of the protection order, an appellate court may order, upon a petition, the suspension of the validity of the protection order until the judgment on the immediate appeal against a ruling has come into effect.

In reasons for judgment released today, the BC Court of Appeal overturned the order of a Master denying the defendant costs thrown away in circumstances where the plaintiff was successful in obtaining an adjournment of an impending trial.

It can be discerned from Foskett J's judgment that, in a case where the Claimant's prospects of success were plainly much better than such an offer would suggest, and if no rationale was provided by the Claimant's representatives as to the basis for the offer, there is a chance that the court might deem the offer not to have been a genuine offer to settle.

Where the Jersey Court has in personam jurisdiction over the judgment debtor, such disclosure orders could be granted in respect of a judgment debtor's worldwide assets, even if only assets within the jurisdiction had been frozen **.

The risks of predicting a trial court judgment are compounded if the claim goes on appeal where appeal court judges frequently place an importance on facts not regarded as important by the trial judge.

It was thought that it was contrary to this spirit of «full faith and credit» (in Morguard's words, sort of) and administrative simplicity to allow defendants to wait in the bushes while the original court held a trial — even in default of appearance — and then attack jurisdiction only when the judgment came to be enforced in a place where the defendant had assets.

17 As a result of this asymmetry, the court that makes the most authoritative pronouncements on the standard for granting summary judgment — the Court of Appeal — tends to do so in cases where the motions court has denied the complainant her day in ccourt that makes the most authoritative pronouncements on the standard for granting summary judgment — the Court of Appeal — tends to do so in cases where the motions court has denied the complainant her day in cCourt of Appeal — tends to do so in cases where the motions court has denied the complainant her day in ccourt has denied the complainant her day in courtcourt.

First, unless the defendant, anonymous Twitter user, resides in Canada (where there is a bilateral reciprocal enforcement of foreign judgments treaty with the UK), the service out of the jurisdiction without prior leave of the court will require a letter of request / letters rogatory (particularly if he / she resides in the U.S.).

Reasons for judgment were released today by the BC Supreme Court addressing whether a witness who has a good understanding of English should have their credibility negatively assessed where they choose to testify trough an interpreter.

This notion is fortified by the remarks made by the Court, seemingly as an afterthought, in paragraphs 48 and 49 of the judgment in the case of X and X, where the Court notes that a decision to allow third - country nationals to lodging applications for visas on the basis of the Visa Code in order to apply for international protection in the Member State to which they will travel would undermine the general structure of the Dublin system.

The court, noting that this issue did not involve an area where the judgment of the GMC is to be afforded special weight in recognition of its expertise but concerned an erroneous legal judgment, decided that the GMC had misdirected itself in law and that there had been a breach of Art 6.

That the Court is keen to avoid such a conclusion is clear from the argument brought forth in the statement of the Court in paragraphs 46 and 47 of the judgment, where the Court finds that its decision to rule for the non-applicability of the Visa Code does not run contrary to the distinct requirement of the Visa Code to refuse a visa in case there are doubts with regard to the applicant's intention to leave the territory of the Member State after the expiry of the visa — a refusal that would be taken as a result of the application of the Visa Code, not as a result of its non-applicability.

The law librarians of Ontario would be ecstatic if the Superior Court would issue a practice direction welcoming (or merely allowing) the use of online forms of judgments for books of authorities where the online version is reliable, has paragraph numbering, etc. (see my earlier SLAW blog post here from January 2008 on this topic).

(Sources: Mary Jane Hatton and Joseph James, Case Management in the Family Court: A Guide to Implementation, Office of the Chief Judge, Ontario Court (Provincial Division), May 1995; Patrick LeSage and Michael Code, Report of the Review of Large and Complex Criminal Case Procedures, «Judicial Case Management, Especially at the Pre-trial Stage,» November 2008; Margot Gibb - Clark, «Where judgment is swift,» The Globe and Mail, February 28, 1995, p. B16.)

Where a creditor's application with notice to register a judgment in Alberta is successful, the judgment is of the same force and effect as if as if it had been a judgment given originally in the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench on the date of the registration and is valid for ten years from that date.

The roundtable raised the question of whether that leadership has extended to its judgments, or whether to some extent the Court is acquiescing in the government's willingness to let participants function without the benefit of counsel, even where judges view counsel as essential.

Chief Magistrate Roberts acquitted the accused relying on an earlier Nova Scotia court judgment: «Unless the witness is able to testify with confidence what characteristics and what «something» has stirred and clarified his memory or recognition, then an identification confined to «that is the man», standing by itself, can not be more than a vague general description and is untrustworthy in any sphere of life where certitude is essential.»

Microsoft also submitted Judge Posner's decision to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, where it has a summary judgment motion on Motorola's request for injunctive relief pending.

We were retained by Bentley Systems, Inc. in this commercial dispute from Madison County, Alabama, involving an asset purchase agreement where the trial court entered judgment against Bentley on its counterclaim for breach of contract.

(2) from any final judgment of the Court of Québec in a case where such court has exclusive jurisdiction under any Act other than this Court of Québec in a case where such court has exclusive jurisdiction under any Act other than this court has exclusive jurisdiction under any Act other than this Code;

The Court held that the motion judge erred in allowing summary judgment on the negligence claim against the Pearlmans where there were issues of material fact whether Samantha knowingly permitted Thomas to operate her car in violation of a provision of G.L. c. 90 and whether that violation was causally related to the accident.

However, it remains to be seen whether the Execution Court will in fact take such an approach, particularly in circumstances where it is clear that the DIFC Courts have merely been used as a means or conduit to avoid recognition of the judgment through the Dubai Courts.

The question of delays in the Supreme Court will be discussed below where it will be seen that the problem has not gone away, though the delays appear to be more in the time taken between the time of hearing and the date of delivery of judgment rather than in the time taken to have an appeal heard.

To a far greater extent than the judgments disclose, counsel for the school had rested his argument about justification squarely and almost exclusively on Sahin, where both chambers of the Strasbourg Court had deferred, with little sign of strain, to the rulings of the Turkish courts and other authorities.

The Supreme Court also expressly sanctions a party's use of a motion for directions to seek an order to stay or dismiss the summary judgment motion in circumstances where that motion is «premature or improper.»

In Tannadyce, the Supreme Court in the majority judgment of Blanchard, Tipping and Gault JJ (delivered by Tipping J) confined judicial review to cases where the taxpayer was unable to bring its grievance within the statutory process.

Micro-match Having listened to the disputed expert evidence — and studied pictorial depictions of the ear in question — the court's judgment was that ear print comparison was capable of providing information which could identify the person who had left such a print on a surface where minutiae concerning the ear could be identified and matched.

He relies on the judgment of this court in Martin v. Listowel Memorial Hospital 2000 CanLII 16947 (ON CA), (2000), 51 O.R. (3d) 384 (C.A.) where, at para. 32, the court said that «there is no basis in s. 1 [of the Negligence Act] or anywhere in the Act for a judge to attribute a portion of fault to a non-party.»

For one, it suggests a court can control the scope of a motion for summary judgment through early judicial involvement and, where necessary, the parties can bring a motion for directions in advance of a planned summary judgment motion.

It is to be expected that many lawyers will be reticent to hire a joint expert, without the possibility of reviewing the report, particularly in cases where the report may very well bind the Court's judgment.

Rosanna Foskett examines the recent judgment in Hart and Samways v Burbidge, which illustrates how the courts will apply the principle of presumed undue influence, even where such influence was not intentional

On the 18 th June 2014, the Supreme Court passed a judgment of significant importance for those who have a criminal record and seek employment where criminal record checks are required.

AMTF argued that art 5.3 of the Judgments Regulation provides that jurisdiction will be established «in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict, in the courts for the place where the harmful event occurred or may occur...».

However, a trial judge has discreton to dny a plaintiff costs (fees included) where the judgment could have been rendered in a court of lesser jurisdiction, meaning the compensatory award is $ 25,000 or less.