Search for: "Anonymous 4 v Anonymous 4" Results 1 - 20 of 1,545
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 May 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
These are core tenets of the accounting profession.[4] Why Does Tone at the Top Matter for Public Accounting Firms? [read post]
19 Apr 2024, 4:51 pm by INFORRM
The Inter-American Court of Human RightsIndigenous People Maya Kaqchikel from Sumpango v. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 7:28 pm
 Under the Biden Administration, agencies across the USG have pursued policies, initiatives, and programming to promote respect for human and labor rights, expand the use of green energy, further a just transition, counter corruption, protect human rights defenders (HRDs), advance gender equity andequality, and promote rights-respecting technology. (2024 US NAP p. 3, 4)One moves here from collaboration and incentive to compliance based regimes overseen by a blended techno-bureaucracy… [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 4:01 am by Brooke MacKenzie
The recent appeal decision AA v Law Society of Ontario upheld the Law Society Tribunal’s 2023 decision to licence to applicant “AA” after finding him to be of “good character”—even though AA had admitted to have sexually abused three young children in 2009 (and to hiding this information from the Law Society in an earlier licensing application, which he withdrew in 2017 following an anonymous tip disclosing the abuse). [read post]
21 Mar 2024, 5:52 am by Eugene Volokh
" In considering whether the presumption against pseudonymity is rebutted, courts consider "(1) whether the plaintiff seeking anonymity is suing to challenge governmental activity; (2) whether prosecution of the suit will compel the plaintiff to disclose information 'of the utmost intimacy'; (3) whether the litigation compels plaintiff to disclose an intention to violate the law, thereby risking criminal prosecution; … (4) whether the plaintiff is a… [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 5:34 pm by INFORRM
CPR r 39.2(5) does not specify for how long the anonymity orders made under rule 39.2(4) should remain on the Judiciary website, once published. [read post]