Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Number Name Notable Rules 1 Client-Lawyer Relationship 1.1: Duty of Competence [7]; 1.6: Confidentiality of client information. [8] Note that these confidentiality requirements overlap with but are distinct from evidentiary rules of attorney-client privilege.
The rules of natural justice require that the decision maker approaches the decision making process with "fairness". What is fair in relation to a particular case may differ. As pointed out by Lord Bridge in Lloyd v McMahon, [26] "the rules of natural justice are not engraved on tablets of stone". Below are some examples of what the rules of ...
In UK public law, the duty of candour is the duty imposed on a public authority "not to seek to win [a] litigation at all costs but to assist the court in reaching the correct result and thereby to improve standards in public administration."
The Federal Courts Act, and the concurrent Federal Courts Rules govern any application for judicial review in the federal courts. The source of this power can be found in s. 28 of the Federal Courts Act, which provides that the Federal Court of Appeal is the appropriate venue for judicial review of decisions by federal boards and tribunals. In ...
The analysis will bring the court to decide whether it agrees with the determination of the decision maker; if not, the court will substitute its own view and provide the correct answer. From the outset, the court must ask whether the tribunal’s decision was correct.
The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (c. 15) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.It provides for several diverse matters relating to the law, some of them being significant changes to the structure of the courts and fundamental legal procedures.
One form of imputed bias is based on the decision-maker being a party to a suit, or having a pecuniary or proprietary interest in the outcome of the decision. Once this fact has been established, the bias is irrebuttable and disqualification is automatic—the decision-maker will be barred from adjudicating the matter without the need for any ...
Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 562 U.S. 411 (2011), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an employer may be held liable for employment discrimination under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) if a biased supervisor's actions are a proximate cause of an adverse employment action, even if the ultimate decision-maker was not personally ...