Tay Kim Chuan Patrick v PublicAccountants Board Facts The appellant ("Tay")‚ who was a publicaccountant‚ appeared before an Inquiry Committee ("IC") appointed by the respondent ("PAB")‚ where he faced 19 charges concerning breaches of professional and technical standards. The appellant was then suspended for 18 months on the ground of professional misconduct. On appeal‚ he denied the allegation of professional misconduct and asserted that the penalty was too harsh. Held‚ dismissing the appeal:
Premium Audit Profession Financial audit
As your lady is aware the advertisement identified that the offer was to remain open until the end of March. One would likely presume this meant the offer was open until the 31st of the month and this was the day on which the appellant expressed his wish to withdraw his offer. The 31st however fell upon a Saturday‚ a day on which the shop was closed for trading. The law in question must therefore consider if the remained open until the last day of March or the offer did in fact finish on the last
Premium Contract
2000 CASE DIGESTS C R I M I N A L L A W SUMMARY OF DOCTRINES JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES Self-Defense The invocation of self-defense is an admission of the killing and its authorship. By this admission‚ the burden of proof shifts to the accused who must establish all elements of the justifying circumstance. The nature and number of wounds inflicted disprove the plea of self-defense because they demonstrate determined effort to kill and not just defend himself. (People v. Magayac
Premium Criminal law Rape
Lord Jauncey commented on the anomaly that the appellant had mentioned. The anomaly being that unlike a sheriff principal having served for less than ten years‚ a sheriff principal who has been removed from office for being unfit for service due to inability having served for longer than ten years would not be paid an annuity. Lord Jauncey said “Why such a distinction was drawn is not obvious.” He also thinks that although the addition of the fourth proviso to section 20 of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland)
Premium Law United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
that before there can be a verdict of guilty‚ the prosecution must make the jury feel sure that the verdict is the right one - Imprecise. Criminal Law - Defence of automatism - Unsworn statement of accused - No foundation for defence. The appellant was convicted of the murder of his wife and sentenced to death. On his appeal it was con-tended‚ inter alia‚ that: (i) the learned trial judge’s directions to the jury on standard of proof were defective; and (ii) the learned trial judge was in error
Premium Jury Law Appeal
FACTS (Facts of case in brief) There are two parties in this case; the appellant is Kamil and brothers a registered partnership firm and the respondent is Central Dairy Farm‚ Uttar Pradesh Pashu Dhan Uddyog Nigam Limited. A contract is awarded to the appellant for the supply of 30000 live sheep and goats to the respondent @ Rs. 786/- per quintal. The contract was stipulated for a period of one year. The appellant deposited a sum of Rs. 260000/- as security for the good performance of the
Premium Court Appeal Appellate court
which led to the following disputes. There were a set of complaints and hence it becomes essential to only focus on therelevant issues and facts realted to our analysis and stick to facts in gist. It has been found and is not disputed that the appellant carried on business in fertiliser and foodgrains under licence issued by the appropriate authorities. Its premises were visited by the Police Inspector‚
Premium Constitution of India Law Government of India
Jan. 26‚ 2011 (1st Division)‚ J. Velasco Jr. Facts: That on or about the 15th day of June 2005‚ a buy-bust operation was conducted at KFC Welcome Rotonda. Accused-appellant unlawfully sold 0.12 gm. of white crystalline substance and she was found to be in possession and control of 0.27 gm. of the same substance. The accused-appellant was arrested and the buy-bust money was recovered from her by PO3 Magcalayo. PO3 Villamor recovered the other two (2) plastic sachets also from her. The latter then
Premium Stare decisis Law Supreme Court of the United States
C.A. No. 299 March 18‚ 1946 FELIX ADAN‚ plaintiff-appellant‚ vs. AGAPITO CASILI and VICTORIA ADAN‚ defendants-appellees. OZAETA‚ J.: The plaintiff Felix Adan commenced this action in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur against his sister Victoria Adan and the latter’s husband‚ Agapito Casili‚ to secure the judicial partition of the estate left by their deceased mother‚ Simplicia Nepomuceno‚ alleged to consist of six parcels of land which are specifically described in
Premium Plaintiff Defendant Complaint
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR ROONEY v. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2012 MEMORIAL FOR THE APPELLANT i TABLE OF CONTENTS Index of Authorities .................................................................................................... iii Statement of Jurisdiction.............................................................................................. iv Statement of Facts .........................................................................................
Premium Questioned document examination Expert witness Expert