Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 2012 Page 3 of about 89 results (0.225 seconds)

Jan 11 2012 (FN)

Hosanna-tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School Vs. Eeoc

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-11-2012

..... ministerial exception bars such a suit. we express no view on whether the exception bars other types of suits, including actions by employees alleging breach of contract or tortious conduct by their religious employers. there will be time enough to address the applicability of the exception to other circumstances if and when they ..... she viewed the question whether perich qualified as a minister to be closer than did the majority, but agreed that the fact that the duties of the contract teachers are the same as the duties of the called teachers is telling. id., at 782, 784. we granted certiorari. 563 u. s. ___ ..... notified the school principal, stacey hoeft, that she would be able to report to work the following month. hoeft responded that the school had already contracted with a lay teacher to fill perich s position for the remainder of the school year. hoeft also expressed concern that perich was not yet ready ..... for an open-ended term; at hosanna-tabor, a call could be rescinded only for cause and by a supermajority vote of the congregation. lay or contract teachers, by contrast, are not required to be trained by the synod or even to be lutheran. at hosanna-tabor, they were appointed by the ..... 2005, she notified the school principal that she would be able to report to work in february. the principal responded that the school had already contracted with a lay teacher to fill perich s position for the remainder of the school year. the principal also expressed concern that perich was not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2012 (FN)

Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 - Reference by the Attorney ...

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-21-2012

..... provisions about the commission are set out in schedule 2 to the 2006 act. among them is paragraph 4 which sets out its powers. these include, in particular, entering into contracts, charging for goods and services, investing sums not immediately required for its functions and accepting gifts: paragraph 4(2). there is no indication either in section 27 itself or in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 31 2012 (FN)

Jessy Saint Prix Vs. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Oct-31-2012

..... the secretary of state further submits that the claimant's case leaves it uncertain whether and for how long a pregnant women who has no continuing employment contract and is not self-employed remains a 'worker' and points out that some women, once pregnant, may never return or intend to return to work. ..... literal wording of article 7(3)(a). 13. it is argued that it would be wrong to place decisive weight on the continuation of a contract of employment in such circumstances. in cis/1042/2008, the secretary of state conceded to the social security commissioner that a self-employed woman who ..... c-413/01) [2003] ecr i-13187, it was held that a person might retain her 'worker' status after the ending of a fixed-term contract. 12. furthermore, they argue that the court has on a number of occasions given significant weight to the prospect of eu citizens being deterred from exercising their ..... registered as a job-seeker with the relevant employment office; (c) he/she is in duly recorded involuntary unemployment after completing a fixed-term employment contract of less than a year or after having become involuntarily unemployed during the first twelve months and has registered as a job-seeker with the relevant ..... parties' arguments 10. it is common ground between the parties that the term 'worker' includes (i) a person who currently has a contract of employment with an employer, but who is on paid or unpaid maternity leave; and (ii) in certain circumstances, a person who does not currently have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 25 2012 (FN)

Perry and Others Vs. Serious Organised Crime Agency

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Jul-25-2012

lord phillips (with whom lady hale, lord brown, lord kerr and lord wilson agree) 1. this is a judgment in two appeals that this court heard together. they raise issues as to the scope of the powers conferred by the proceeds of crime act 2002 ("poca"). they arise out of attempts by the respondent ("soca"), acting apparently on its own initiative, to deprive the first appellant ("mr perry"), together with members of his family or entities associated with them, of the fruits of serious criminal fraud for which mr perry has been convicted in israel, wherever in the world those fruits may be found. soca intends to achieve this aim by invoking the powers of civil recovery conferred on the high court by part 5 of poca. so far, however, it has not got beyond preliminary steps aimed at ensuring that the substantive relief which it seeks is effective. one of those steps has been obtaining a worldwide property freezing order in respect of property held by the appellants in appeal 0143. i shall call this "the pfo appeal". the other step has been to obtain a disclosure order, under which notices have been given to the appellants in appeal 0182. i shall call this "the do appeal". it is logical to consider the pfo appeal first, for the result of this appeal will have some bearing on the do appeal. the pfo appeal introduction and factual background 2. some of this introduction will be relevant to both appeals. the substantive relief that soca seeks consists of civil recovery orders in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2012 (FN)

Secretary of State for the Home Department Vs. R (on the Application o ...

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Jul-18-2012

lord hope 1. the respondent, hussain zulfiquar alvi, is a citizen of pakistan. he was born on 5 november 1977. on 20 september 2003 he entered the united kingdom as a student, with leave to remain until 31 january 2005. after completing his studies he applied for leave to remain here as a physiotherapy assistant. on 10 february 2005 he was granted leave to remain as a qualifying work permit holder until 10 february 2009. for the next four years he worked as a physiotherapy assistant at a clinic in kensington. 2. on 9 february 2009 mr alvi applied for further leave to remain in this country. a few months prior to that date the work permit regime had been replaced by a points-based system. it came into effect on 27 november 2008. so mr alvi applied for leave to remain under that system as a tier 2 (general) migrant. his application was rejected as invalid on 24 february 2009 because a mandatory section of his application form had not been completed. he re-submitted his application on 24 march 2009. it was refused on 18 june 2009 because the secretary of state was not satisfied that his salary was appropriate for a job at the required level. on 21 september 2009 mr alvi applied for judicial review of the secretary of state's decision. on 9 february 2010 the refusal of 18 june 2009 was replaced by a revised decision letter. in that letter it was stated that mr alvi did not satisfy the requirements of the immigration rules for the relevant category because his job title as an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 21 2012 (FN)

Dorsey Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-21-2012

dorsey v. united states note:?where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. the syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the court but has been prepared by the reporter of decisions for the convenience of the reader. see united states v. detroit timber & lumber co., 200 u. s. 321 . supreme court of the united states syllabus dorsey v. united states certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit no. 11 5683.?argued april 17, 2012 decided june 21, 2012 [ 1 ] under the anti-drug abuse act (1986 drug act), the 5- and 10-year mandatory minimum prison terms for federal drug crimes reflected a 100-to-1 disparity between the amounts of crack cocaine and powder cocaine needed to trigger the minimums. thus, the 5-year minimum was triggered by a conviction for possessing with intent to distribute 5 grams of crack cocaine but 500 grams of powder, and the 10-year minimum was triggered by a conviction for possessing with intent to distribute 50 grams of crack but 5,000 grams of powder. the united states sentencing commission which is charged under the sentencing reform act of 1984 with writing the federal sentencing guidelines incorporated the 1986 drug act s 100-to-1 disparity into the guidelines because it believed that doing so was the best way to keep similar drug-trafficking sentences proportional, thereby satisfying the sentencing reform act s basic .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2012 (FN)

Faa Vs. Cooper

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-28-2012

faa v. cooper note:?where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. the syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the court but has been prepared by the reporter of decisions for the convenience of the reader. see united states v. detroit timber & lumber co., 200 u. s. 321 . supreme court of the united states syllabus federal aviation administration et al. v. cooper certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 10 1024.?argued november 30, 2011 decided march 28, 2012 respondent cooper, a licensed pilot, failed to disclose his human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) diagnosis to the federal aviation administration (faa) at a time when the agency did not issue medical certificates, which are required to operate an aircraft, to persons with hiv. subsequently, respondent applied to the social security administration (ssa) and received long-term disability benefits on the basis of his hiv status. thereafter, he renewed his certificate with the faa on several occasions, each time intentionally withholding information about his condition. the department of transportation (dot), the faa s parent agency, launched a joint criminal investigation with the ssa to identify medically unfit individuals who had obtained faa certifications. the dot provided the ssa with the names of licensed pilots, and the ssa, in turn, provided the dot with a spreadsheet containing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2012 (FN)

Consolidated Information Services Limited (Formerly Viagogo Limited) ( ...

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-21-2012

..... of appeal dismissed viagogo's appeal [2011] ewca civ 1585. it confirmed the findings of tugendhat j that the rfu had an arguable case on the ground of breach of contract and trespass. it decided that the rfu had no readily available alternative means of discovering who the possible wrongdoers were other than by means of a norwich pharmacal order. on ..... there was a good arguable case that those who had received tickets from the rfu and the subsequent sellers and buyers of the tickets had been guilty of breach of contract and/or conversion [2011] ewhc 764 (qb). he also held that those who entered the stadium by use of a ticket obtained in contravention of rfu conditions were arguably guilty ..... . the rfu's terms and conditions stipulate that any resale of a ticket or any advertisement of a ticket for sale at above face value will constitute a breach of contract rendering the ticket null and void, so that all rights evidenced by the ticket are extinguished. applicants for tickets indicate agreement to these terms and conditions when submitting ticket application .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 04 2012 (FN)

Gow (Fc) Vs. Grant (Scotland)

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Jul-04-2012

..... the price at which the flat was sold in june 2003 was 38,000. 12. mrs gow was employed as an audio typist until the parties began living together. her contract came to an end in may 2003, and at mr grant's request she did not seek further work. she was in receipt of an occupational pension and a state .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 2012 (FN)

In the Matter of Peacock

Court : UK Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-22-2012

lord brown 1. suppose that a convicted drug trafficker is found to have benefited from his trafficking to the extent of 1m but, having at the time realisable property worth only 100,000, a confiscation order is initially made against him just for this lesser sum. suppose then that the defendant, entirely legitimately, later acquires property to the value of upwards of a further 900,000. is he at that stage liable to a further court order increasing to the full extent of his criminal gain the amount recoverable under the confiscation order by reference to these after-acquired assets? 2. it is not in doubt that, assuming his offences were committed after 24 march 2003, and that he were therefore subject to the provisions of the proceeds of crime act 2002 ("poca"), the answer would be a clear "yes" see particularly section 22(3) of poca. but what if, as in the case of this appellant, his offences were committed before that date so that he falls to be dealt with under the drug trafficking act 1994 ("the 1994 act"), in particular under section 16 of that act? section 16, as amended by section 165(1) of, and paragraph 169 of schedule 9 to, the powers of criminal courts (sentencing act 2000, provides: "(1) this section applies where, by virtue of section 5(3) of this act, the amount which a person is ordered to pay by a confiscation order is less than the amount assessed to be the value of his proceeds of drug trafficking. (2) if, on an application made in accordance with .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //