Nouvelles.droit.org

🕒
RSS JSON
section canadian gratuité work legal under access order court mag restrictions fin state consumers now pensions warranties secretary warranty moss guide nixing act repair editors revised can upper rules edition data tribunal that
4 Résultats (1 - 4)
Décisions des tribunaux judiciaires : la fin de la gratuité de l’open data ? (Actualités - gf2i)
: ✨✨ INVITATION – Les décryptages du gf2i✨✨📅mardi 29 avril de 9H00 à 9h45 👉Décisions des tribunaux judiciaires : la fin de la gratuité de l’open data ? 🎯 Inscription gratuite et obligatoire ici : https://lnkd.in/eqAccQHZ Voici quelques semaines, le ministre de la Justice a mis en place (lettre de mission jointe) un groupe de travail, piloté par la Cour de cassation, chargé de réfléchir et de formuler des recommandations sur trois questions relatives au développement de l’open data des décisions de justice.Elles portent sur :✔ l’occultation des informations relatives aux noms des magistrats et professionnels de justice ;✔ le respect des secrets protégés par la loi dans les décisions ;✔ le modèle de financement de l’open data. Cette mission, décidée dans le contexte de disette budgétaire, est-elle un symptôme passager ou marque-t-elle un point de rupture et le début d’une bascule de la politique publique de l’open data ? Faut-il y voir un changement d’attitude des pouvoirs publics sur la rémunération des données[...]
LC v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (anonymity order) (Judgement Courts Tribunals England Wales)
: UT ref: UA-2026-000083-PIP In the Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber 28 October 2026 Before: Stewart Wright Judge of the Upper Tribunal Between: LC -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Anonymity Order Appellant: LC Respondents: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Tribunal: First tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) Tribunal venue: Scarborough Tribunal Case Nos: SC231/24/00181 Tribunal decision date: 29 August 2025 NOTICE: Any breach of this order is liable to be treated as a contempt of court and may be punishable by imprisonment, fine or other sanctions under section 25 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The maximum punishment that may be imposed is a sentence of two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine. It is ordered , under rule 14(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal Rules) 2008, that, without the permission of this Tribunal, no one shall disclose or publish the name, or any part of the address, of the appellant in these proceedings or publish [...]
Revised First Edition of the Canadian Open Access Legal Citation Guide Now Available (Canadian Association of Law Libraries / L'Association canadienne des bibliothèques de droit CALL/ACBD Blog)
: A revised first edition of the Canadian Open Access Legal (COAL) Citation Guide/Guide canadien de la référence juridique en accès libre (RJAL) is now available. The guide’s editors have incorporated reader feedback and corrections into a revised edition. Some of the changes include moving the general rules to their own section and revising rules on citing regularly updated books, regulations, administrative decisions, and generative AI for greater clarity and increased consistency across the guide. Additions to the guide include guidance on creating a bibliography/table of authorities and on citing reports, dissertations, municipal by-laws, court materials, First Nations, Métis, and Inuit - Crown Treaties, amongst other sources. A more detailed list is in the guide’s introduction. Since the publication of the guide in June 2024, the editors have led multiple online training sessions and conference workshops. We are now working on training materials that reflect the revised edition. The francophone editors c[...]
Nixing the Fix: Warranties, Mag-Moss, and restrictions on repairs (FTC USA Business Blog Posts)
: Nixing the Fix: Warranties, Mag-Moss, and restrictions on repairs lfair March 18, 2019 | 10:24AM Nixing the Fix: Warranties, Mag-Moss, and restrictions on repairs By Lesley Fair First, the bad news: That nifty purchase needs a repair. Now the good news for consumers: It’s still under warranty. But where can they go to get it fixed? Can the manufacturer restrict a consumer’s ability to go to the independent repair shop of their choice? Can the manufacturer use glue, non-standard screws, and proprietary diagnostic software that make it difficult for independent repair shops to fix things? Do limitations like these affect consumers’ rights under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ? That’s the topic of Nixing the Fix: A Workshop on Repair Restrictions , an FTC event scheduled for July 16, 2019 . Enforced by the FTC, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act helps consumers make informed buying decisions and gives them access to remedies if the widget starts to fidget during the warranty period. One key consumer protection unde[...]