Preface: Due to space constraints I will be focusing on the actions taken by and taken against BILAL Skaf solely as opposed to his brother MOHAMMED Skaf. In addition, I will be concentrating on the events which the charges were given rise to on 12 August 2000 and as opposed to 2 separate cases rape cases which Bilal Skaf was also a belligerent for the month of August 2000. I will also be mentioning the recent appeal case in 2008 which reduced the sentences given for the crimes in 2006.…
Mr. Coalk was hired by UV Systems Technology Inc. As their vice president of sales and Marketing in September 1997. Mr. Coalk entered into contract on February 28, 2000 with UVST and during this period parent company was SSI Ltd. UVST failed to pay entitled commission, expenses and wages. He filed a case for failure of entitled payment under Employment Standard Act. Lower court dismissed the case whereas supreme court overturn lower court judgement by awarding Mr. Coalk $180,000 in missing payment. Court also found that UVST and SSI Ltd. Were common employer so R. Coalk should have signed contract with both parent company SSI Ltd. And parent company UVST (The Common Employer, 2008). I think court made right decision by rewarding Mr.Coalk missing amount.…
This is a 2000 word RBI on Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 86 (Absence without leave)…
This is the appellant’s skeleton argument for the case of his appeal. The arguments to quash the conviction under s. 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA) are based on the misdirection’s…
Death sentence has always been a question of controversy, while on one hand it becomes a matter of human rights with respect to the accused; on the other hand it is one of weighing the gravity of the crime and its impact on the society. However, in the wake of the recent gang rape that took place in the city of Delhi, society has voiced strong opinion to award death sentence to the perpetrators. In the said case the death of the rape victim has led to imposition of section 302, IPC that prescribes the punishment for murder.…
In respect of certain contracts of work assigned by the appellant certain disputes having been arisen, the matter was referred to arbitration. Two awards were made and the same were filed in the court of the Civil Judge in two Title (Arbitration) Suits Nos. 37/86 and 40/86. By a common order, the trial court made the awards rule of court in entirety and decrees were drawn in terms thereof. An appeal was filed against the said common order before the High Court. The High Court having dismissed the said appeal, the matter was carried to the Supreme Court.…
The petitioner went to the COMELEC, which dismissed his appeal on the ground that it had no power to review the decision of the RTC, based on Section 9 of R.A. 6679, that decisions of the RTC in a protest appealed to it from the municipal trial court in barangay elections “on questions of fact shall be final and non-appealable”. In his petition for certiorari, the COMELEC is faulted for not taking cognizance of the petitioners appeal.…
BRIEF OF THE CASE FOR UPGRADATION OF THE POSTS OF SUPERINTENDENT & DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, CUSTOMS…
appealed for probation under the provisions of Act No. 4221. Judge Tuason of the Manila CFI…
IN THE instant case, the appointment of Lokayukta in the State of Gujarat was challenged. The Governor of Gujarat had appointed R.A. Mehta J. (Retd.) as Lokayukta in consultation with the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Gujarat under section 3(1) of the Gujarat Lokayukta Act, 1986 (hereinafter the Act), without consulting the Chief Minister and his Council of Ministers. Opposing this decision of the Governor, the State of Gujarat filed a writ petition in the High Court of Gujarat, challenging the appointment of R.A. Mehta J. to the post of Lokayukta. The matter was heard by a division bench and a split verdict was given. The matter was subsequently referred to the 3rd judge and on the basis of majority, the writ petition was dismissed and the said appointment was upheld. Hence, these appeals are made by the State of Gujarat against the appointment of respondent.…
Herein respondent Roberto Mabalot filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for preliminary injunction and/or restraining order,[1] against petitioner and LTFRB Chairman Lantin, praying among others that Memorandum Order No. 96-735 be declared “illegal and without effect.” the lower court issued a temporary restraining order enjoining petitioner from implementing Memorandum Order No. 96-735. Secretary Lagdameo issued the assailed Department Order No. 97-1025. Respondent filed a Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Petition assailing the validity of Department Order No. 97-1025.…
Criminal Case Nos. Q-05-135151 and Q-05-135152 were filed against the accused appellant. RTC convicted accused-appellant for violating Sections 5 and 11, Article II of RA 9165 which was affirmed by the CA. Hence, accused-appellant filed an appeal to this Court.…
In the present case, there are two schools which are or can be described vividly to understand the jurisprudence behind hussainara khatoon judgement. Here firstly as mentioned in the facts the prisoners were kept undertrial for minor offences in about 5-10 years also the rich are released on bail though they were more responsible and liable for the offence made but at the same time the poor victims who were not liable but had not enough bail money so they had to remain bars At this very point the positivist school comes into consideration because in positive school they say that the law come from human authority it doesnot see whether the law is good or bad, just or unjust but the law should come from a political superior to a…
Some persons that may not be deserving of a position was given due to relation or favouritism. For example, the case with Devant Maharaj vs. NLCB where he was denied the position of acting Deputy Director of the Board. Gemma Joseph was appointed as acting Deputy Director while Mr Maharaj was over looked and he saw it as victimizations or unfair treatment; he then filed for judicial review on his issue. The commission in this case was ineffective as it did not allow fair treatment with promotions as stated in the Public Service Commission. Mr Maharaj won his case and was appointed as acting Deputy Director, he however did not take up as the position as it may lead to further victimization within the work place. This shows that although there may be regulations in place, it is not always followed due to the neglect of these acts and the very apparent cases of…
The Appellant was charged and prosecuted for commission of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act. On appreciation of evidence available on record, Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha found the Appellant guilty for commission of the said offence and awarded him life imprisonment. Feeling aggrieved thereof, Appellant filed appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The High Court, after categorically examining the oral and documentary evidence available on record came to the conclusion that no case for interference was made out, affirmed the judgment and order of Trial Court and thus dismissed the appeal. The Appellant therefore feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment challenged the same on variety of grounds.…