Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Also, restrictive zoning regulations have made the approval process for development more arduous and extensive. The increased bureaucracy and red tape has meant that developers now encounter a myriad of fees for variance (land use) , a building permit , a certificate of occupancy , a filing (legal) cost, special permits and planned-unit ...
Additional descriptions of existing restrictive laws on methods of practice include gestational limits, state-required waiting periods, parental involvement for minors who are undergoing pregnancy, the prohibition of the use of state funds for abortions, and the lack of insurance coverage in medical insurance plans. [22]
Particular companies may employ restrictive trade practices in order to inflate prices and restrict production in much the same way that a monopoly does. Whenever there is a formal agreement for such collusion between companies that usually compete with one another, the practice is known as a cartel .
RAID (Reinforce Appropriate, Implode Disruptive) is a positive psychology least restrictive practice approach for working with people who exhibit challenging behaviour. The RAID approach is written by Dr William Davies and is published and distributed by the Association for Psychological Therapies .
An example of a disability that may require a student to attend a special school is intellectual disability. However, this practice is often frowned upon by school districts in the US in the light of the least restrictive environment as mandated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. [26]
The Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1956 (4 & 5 Eliz. 2. c. 68) was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom intended to enforce competition, and provide an appropriate check on restrictive combines and practices. It required that any agreement between companies that restricted trading should be placed on a public register unless granted ...
Another example is the D.C. Circuit Court's 2007 ruling in Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenbach that compelling government interest was demonstrated in the restriction of unapproved prescription drugs. [1] The burden of proof falls on the state in cases that require strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny, but not the rational basis.
In this case a combination of firms was carrying out the restrictive practice, rather than a single firm, which made the conduct susceptible to challenge under section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1) rather than under the heightened standard of section 2 of that act (15 U.S.C. § 2). Even so, the case was brought under both sections.