Search for: "US v. Banks" Results 5521 - 5540 of 12,619
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am by NL
In that event the applicant’s rights are reinforced in two ways: first, by requiring the reviewing officer to give advance notice of a proposed adverse decision and the reasons for it; and, secondly, by allowing the applicant to make both written and oral representations on it.This was supported in Banks v Kingston-Upon-Thames RLBC [2008] EWCA Civ 1443 on the ‘objective’ of Reg 8(2).The meaning of ‘deficiency’ was set out by Carnwath LJ in Hall… [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am by NL
In that event the applicant’s rights are reinforced in two ways: first, by requiring the reviewing officer to give advance notice of a proposed adverse decision and the reasons for it; and, secondly, by allowing the applicant to make both written and oral representations on it.This was supported in Banks v Kingston-Upon-Thames RLBC [2008] EWCA Civ 1443 on the ‘objective’ of Reg 8(2).The meaning of ‘deficiency’ was set out by Carnwath LJ in Hall… [read post]
30 Aug 2007, 11:17 am
County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware (N.J. 2006) 912 A.2d 88, 100.) [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 4:09 am by Edith Roberts
Arab Bank, which asks whether corporations are liable under the Alien Tort Statute. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 3:00 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The law is very clear that an agreement to perform unaudited services does not shield an accountant from liability because an accountant must perform all services in accordance with the standard of a reasonable accountant under similar circumstances, which includes reporting fraud that is or should be apparent (see 1136 Tenants’ Corp. v Rothenberg & Co., 36 AD2d 804 [1st Dept 1971], affd 30 NY2d 585 [1972]; see also William Iselin & Co., Inc. v Mann Judd… [read post]
In addition, from 12 March 2022 it is prohibited to provide specialised financial messaging services to the following banks or any Russian-established subsidiary that is directly or indirectly owned (50% or more) by such banks (i.e., a “SWIFT ban”): (i) Bank Otkritie; (ii) Novikombank; (iii) Promsvyazbank; (iv) Bank Rossiya; (v) Sovcombank; (vi) Vnesheconombank (“VEB”); and (vii) VTB Bank. [read post]
19 Feb 2010, 9:15 am by AALRR
The amount of paid leave that can be used for that purpose is limited to the amount of paid leave that would be accrued during six months at the rate of accrual at the time the leave is taken.On February 18, 2010, in McCarther v. [read post]
27 Feb 2010, 2:01 pm by Trademark Attorney
It wasn’t until the 90’s, in the seminal Supreme Court case of State Street Bank v. [read post]