Sentences with phrase «with claimant groups»

Where a State assesses the native title claim against legal criteria prior to entering negotiations with the claimant group it is important that there is a clear understanding by the group of what is required to satisfy the government's test.

A developing practice by state governments is to require a connection report from independent experts about the merits of the native title claim prior to entering into negotiations with the claimant group.

I conclude that a policy based on these principles would, working in partnership with the claimant group:

Not exact matches

The problem with the IPT, as Harriet Wistrich, a solicitor with Birnberg Pierce and Partners, acting for one group of claimants, explained, is that it is «a completely unfair process»

«We know there is a small group of benefit claimants without the major physical or health barriers to work associated with incapacity benefit - who live in areas where there is no shortage of vacancies, particularly for low - skilled jobs but who nonetheless remain on benefits for long periods of time,» he said.

«I am impressed by the success of the Pathways programme - it proves that with the right support we can make a difference even with long - term benefit claimants, which is a group of people usually considered harder to help,» employment minister Stephen Timms said.

A group of claims handlers found that, over a 12 - month period between mid-2013 and mid-2014, up to 30 % of PPI offers made by some providers included comparative redress, with claimants affected being about # 730 worse off on average.

(i) size and nature of the organization; (ii) part of the organization with which the refugee claimant was most directly concerned; (iii) refugee claimant's duties and activities within the organization; (iv) refugee claimant's position or rank in the organization; (v) length of time the refugee claimant was in the organization, particularly after acquiring knowledge of the group's crime or criminal purpose; (vi) method by which the refugee claimant was recruited and opportunity to leave.

We are also familiar with the myriad of cost sharing agreements and client constitution arrangements that bind group litigation, which may be especially complex where claimants have different preliminary challenges to their specific claims.

Acted for the claimant group (one of the UK's largest specialist recruitment businesses providing the Infrastructure sector with permanent, contract and temporary staff) in High Court, Queen's Bench Division proceedings.

[48] Exclusivity might be established by proof that others were excluded from the land, or that others were only allowed access to the land with the permission of the claimant group.

The best known jurisdiction is perhaps, the US, which is renowned, perhaps unfairly, for big ticket group claims, involving many dozens if not hundreds of claimants, with damages in the millions.

Nearly seven years after the start of the court review of the exchange ratio applied to the merger of IMMOEAST and IMMOFINANZ, IMMOFINANZ has reached an agreement in principle through out - of - court negotiations with most of the claimants and the representatives appointed for the respective shareholder groups to terminate these proceedings through settlement.

They were playing in a courtyard and part of a walkway which was the social area for their age group when, running backwards, the first defendant collided with the claimant.

«My reward is knowing my hard work for personal injury clients is appreciated» Annalae Hodgson - Since receiving her Legal Administrative Assistant Certificate from Douglas College in 2010 Annie has worked exclusively on behalf of personal injury claimants at Holness Law Group and is experienced dealing with ICBC insurance adjusters.

We focus on people and partnerships, working closely with a small group of leading claimant law firms, applying our capital and expertise to help grow their practice and better serve their clients.

Although the claimant's association with a historically more advantaged or disadvantaged group or groups is not per se determinative of an infringement, the existence of these pre-existing factors will favour a finding that s. 15 (1) has been infringed.

In R v Spencer, which dealt with informational privacy relating to Internet service subscriber data in the hands of third - party companies, Cromwell J, for the court, organized the expectation of privacy analysis into four general areas: (1) the subject matter of the alleged search; (2) the claimant's interest in the subject matter; (3) the claimant's subjective expectation of privacy; and (4) whether this subjective expectation of privacy was objectively reasonable, having regard to the totality of the circumstances.6 None of these tests are inconsistent; they are articulations of the same overarching concerns grouped differently as suited to a particular inquiry.

In Horace Holman Group Ltd v Sherwood International Group Ltd [2001] All ER (D) 83 (Nov), the claimant adduced oral evidence — not supported by contemporaneous time sheets — of the time spent by its directors and staff in dealing with the defendant's breaches.

Also be careful with labels where there is a group of defendants or claimants.

The Lapps in G and E v Norway (1983) 35 DR 30 and the gipsies in Buckley v United Kingdom (Application 20348 / 92)(1996) 23 EHRR 101, to which the claimants had referred, belonged to distinctive groups, each with a traditional culture and lifestyle so fundamental as to form part of its identity.

The claimant had insurance with the Co-operative Insurance Society (CIS), and legal expenses and assistance insurance provided by DAS Legal Expenses Insurance Co Ltd (DAS), which was part of a group of companies.

An investor group called Sunlot Holdings is seeking to revive the failed Bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox has made a deal with the claimants in two class action lawsuits on a proposed settlement.

Several NTRBs reported that, due to funding shortages, their «engagement» with native title claimant groups is limited to advising and taking instructions from the claim's applicants listed on the Federal Court's records (and this is sometimes only five people on behalf of a group of 100 or more).

Claimant groups who do not have an opportunity to engage with companies are particularly affected.

While a number of states require the claimant group to provide the State with evidence in relation to legal criteria as a condition precedent to commencing negotiation, there are varying degrees to which the legal tests are applied.

As a result, claimant groups will be denied access to a partnership with government essential to their sustainable development.

As required by the Native Title Act, FMG negotiated with both native title parties — the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura People (PKKP), a registered native title claimant group for part of the area, and the Wintiwari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation (WGAC), the registered native title body corporate for the balance of the area.

This chapter evaluates State and Commonwealth native title policies by reference to whether they direct native title negotiations towards the sustainable development of the claimant group in accordance with internationally recognised human rights principles.

Under this approach a state may enter into negotiations with the traditional owner group either through the mediation process offered under the NTA or by means of their own processes without waiting for the collection of evidence by the claimant group in relation to the continuity of their connection, the continuity of their observance of traditional laws and customs and the compilation of a tenure history by the state.

In South Australia the negotiation process is structured to be consistent with the time frames required by the claimant group to develop its capacity to achieve its development goals.

Facilitate the participation of the native title claimant group in the negotiation process both for the purpose of advocating its position, and also to integrate its objectives with those of other stakeholders.

[13] A benefit for all stakeholders in adopting this approach is that it ensures that each individual member act with the authority of the claimant group.

Since the first native title claimant application was lodged by the Quandamooka Peoples in 1995, the process of resolving their native title required the claim group to decide who are the people in the native title claim group, who are the person or people that are the applicant, and negotiate with multiple parties about their native title rights and interests over North Stradbroke Island and some of the surrounding islands and waters of Morton Bay.

In these cases the future act provisions of the NTA provide processes for the conduct of negotiations between the State and native title claimants and an opportunity for States to negotiate with traditional owner groups as if these groups had legally recognised rights to the land.

The requirement for those in the claimant group to express the relationships which connect them in terms of biological descent is at odds with traditional ways of defining who has rights to country...

For example, if a mediator has intimate knowledge of the area and the claimant group, or other Indigenous groups residing in the area, then he or she may run the mediation with a predetermined outcome in mind.

... as a matter of experience in practical affairs, as well as for logical reasons, if it be accepted that the claimant community had no right to occupy these waters to the exclusion of all others, it is difficult to envisage how, in accordance with traditional custom, the group could assert, and effectively assert, a right to trade in the area's resources.

(c) the burden of proof in relation to cessation of native title (whether by expiry, abandonment or extinguishment), once a claimant group has adduced evidence as to its current observance and acknowledgment of traditional laws and customs, and as to the connection with the land or waters; and

Given the gravity of the consequences flowing from a finding that a claimant group is not who they claim (and perceive themselves) to be, and consistent with principles of equality and respect for culture, as well as the intention of the Parliament in enacting the NTA «to rectify past injustices» and establish a «special procedure... for the just and proper ascertainment of native title rights and interests... in a manner that has due regard to their unique character», the Court should, it is respectfully submitted, approach the admission of oral testimonies of native title claimants in ways which accommodate Aboriginal accounts of their histories [85] and are, where appropriate, sceptical in the receipt of written records of the past.

In particular, the Commission seeks leave to challenge as erroneous and inconsistent with the enunciated human rights standards the following aspects of the approach of the trial judge, Olney J, in finding that before the end of the 19th century the claimant group had ceased to acknowledge and observe traditional laws and customs:

In weighing evidence as to whether native title has ceased to exist, it is appropriate for the Court to ask whether there has been shown a clear and plain intention on the part of the claimant group to abandon all underlying connection with the land.

I believe this has nothing to do with any additional uses of the land — generally very marginal — that the determination makes available; rather, the fact that a government institution has formally recognised the claimant group's prior ownership of the subject land and the fact of its dispossession.

The South Australian Government has negotiation threshold issues which include the registration of a native title claim before it will proceed with negotiations (notwithstanding the fact that it engages in non-native title negotiations), the resolution of any significant native title claim overlaps, the need to have a reasonably cohesive native title claimant group, a willingness to negotiate, and a stable functioning management committee.

[67] Such an approach fails to appreciate that Indigenous people have rights both as native title claimants (before any Court decision has been made in relation to the land)[68] and rights after native title has been determined (with the Court's orders identifying the relevant land, group of people, and rights [69]-RRB-.

In these cases the future act provisions of the Native Title Act provide processes for the conduct of negotiations between the State and native title claimants and an opportunity for States to negotiate with traditional owner groups as if these groups had legally recognised rights to the land.

I believe this has nothing to do with any additional uses of the land... rather, the fact that a government institution has formally recognised the claimant group's prior ownership of the subject land and the fact of its dispossession.