Traduction de «reverse a judgement » (Anglais → Français) :

emphasises, while fully endorsing the principle of guaranteed standards of safety and quality, that excessive consumer protection rules risk imposing an unreasonable administrative or legal burden on businesses, especially where such rules lead to a de-facto reversal of the burden of proof, and that the ability of consumers to make their own judgement must be strengthened, and transparency (particularly of the product and of rights, duties and the level of protection) is the basic precondition for this;

The court of final appeal has reversed the judgement of a lower court and convicted two young men for defacing a flag at a peaceful demonstration, despite the incorporation of the ICCPR into the territory's law.

The court of final appeal has reversed the judgement of a lower court and convicted two young men for defacing a flag at a peaceful demonstration, despite the incorporation of the ICCPR into the territory's law.

Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Cools calling the attention of the Senate: (a) to the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in the sexual assault case Her Majesty the Queen v. Steve Brian Ewanchuk, delivered February 25, 1999, which judgment reversed the Alberta Court of Appeal's judgment upholding the trial court's acquittal; (b) to the intervenors in this case, being the Attorney General of Canada, Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, Disabled Women's Network Canada and Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton; (c) to the Supreme Court of Canada's substitution of a conviction for the acquittals of two Alberta ...[+++]courts; (d) to the lengthy concurring reasons for judgment by Supreme Court of Canada Madame Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dube, which reasons condemn the decision-making of Mr. Justice John Wesley McClung of the Alberta Court of Appeal and the decision of the majority of the Alberta Court of Appeal; (e) to Mr. Justice John Wesley McClung's letter published in the National Post on February 26, 1999, reacting to Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dube's statements about him contained in her concurring reasons for judgement; (f) to the nation-wide, extensive commentary and public discussion on the matter; and (g) to the issues of judicial activism and judicial independence in Canada today.

Other The Senate resumed debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Cools calling the attention of the Senate:(a) to the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in the sexual assault case Her Majesty the Queen v. Steve Brian Ewanchuk, delivered February 25, 1999, which judgment reversed the Alberta Court of Appeal's judgment upholding the trial court's acquittal; (b) to the intervenors in this case, being the Attorney General of Canada, Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, Disabled Women's Network Canada and Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton; (c) to the Supreme Court of Canada's substitution of a conviction for the acquittals ...[+++]of two Alberta courts; (d) to the lengthy concurring reasons for judgment by Supreme Court of Canada Madame Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dube, which reasons condemn the decision-making of Mr. Justice John Wesley McClung of the Alberta Court of Appeal and the decision of the majority of the Alberta Court of Appeal; (e) to Mr. Justice John Wesley McClung's letter published in the National Post on February 26, 1999, reacting to Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dube's statements about him contained in her concurring reasons for judgement; (f) to the nation-wide, extensive commentary and public discussion on the matter; and (g) to the issues of judicial activism and judicial independence in Canada today.

(a) to the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in the sexual assault case Her Majesty the Queen v. Steve Brian Ewanchuk, delivered February 25, 1999, which judgment reversed the Alberta Court of Appeal's judgment upholding the trial court's acquittal; (b) to the intervenors in this case, being the Attorney General of Canada, Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, Disabled Women's Network Canada and Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton; (c) to the Supreme Court of Canada's substitution of a conviction for the acquittals of two Alberta courts; (d) to the lengthy concurring reasons for judgment by Supreme Court of Canada Madame Justic ...[+++]e Claire L'Heureux-Dube, which reasons condemn the decision-making of Mr. Justice John Wesley McClung of the Alberta Court of Appeal and the decision of the majority of the Alberta Court of Appeal; (e) to Mr. Justice John Wesley McClung's letter published in the National Post on February 26, 1999, reacting to Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dube's statements about him contained in her concurring reasons for judgement; (f) to the nation-wide, extensive commentary and public discussion on the matter; and (g) to the issues of judicial activism and judicial independence in Canada today.