The Proceedings In The Supreme Court Of India

The potentials in outsourcing in the Philippines are already recognized worldwide. The reasons are language fluency, high skills and low costs. India has dominated the Business Process Outsourcing industry for a long time. But now, there’s a new player in the field that has raised the bar for BPO standards. Like many other neighboring Asian countries, the Philippines offer low costs for their highly skilled professionals. The core reasons of outsourcing. And India has long been the premier outsourcing destination. Even China is now entering the outsourcing scene. But the Philippines’ distinctive advantages over other outsourcing Asian countries are the fluency of the spoken language and familiarity with the principal country. This is the reason why call centers for US based companies are abundant in the country. Philippine history tells us that the country was colonized by the Americans for years. Filipinos and Americans fought side-by-side in the 2nd World War against the Japanese invasion. Even the education system was patterned after that of the Americans. That is why Filipinos’ spoken and written English are more “American-ized”. It is true that in the early years of the new millennium, there were speculations whether the Philippines can become a key player in the BPO industry. 3 billion industry, and still growing! And a report from a U.S. Currently, outsourcing companies and satellite offices are sprouting from Manila to other areas of the country. And the expansion is not because there is an increase in the demand for call centers, but more sophisticated and high-skilled services like website design, medical transcription, software development, animation, seo services and legal services. This means that the US and other countries are finding talent not only in the capital city, where majority of the technology and businesses are located. Is it appropriate to conclude that the Filipinos, in general are highly skilled and talented, wherever they are? Is it enough to consider the Philippines as a more desirable destination for outsourced projects?

Basically, this deals with disputes between States. The European Court of Human Rights is frequently in the news and is the final judicial authority on the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. This important court sits at Strasbourg and operates under the Council of Europe. The Convention basically requires governments to protect certain crucial rights such as the right to life, the right to a fair trial etc. There is a great deal of confusion between the Council of Europe and the European Union. They are distinct international organisations. The Council of Europe has 47 members whereas the European Union has 27 members. The Court of Justice of the European Union sits at Luxembourg and is the final judicial authority on the law of the European Union. The rights of this court are based on the various Treaties (i.e. agreements between States) which set up the European Union.

Courts in England and Wales – Interestingly, the nation’s highest “court” is Parliament of the UK. It is the High Court of Parliament (here) and is the ultimate law-making body for the United Kingdom. Until October 2009 the House of Lords was the final appeal court for all legal matters in the U.K. Scottish criminal cases. In October 2009, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom was created and took over the work previously done by the House of Lords. 12 justices and sits in its own separate building in Parliament Square, London. The court hears only the most important appeals and many of its cases involved difficult and serious issues touching on governmental power and the rights of the citizen. This can give the appearance of the court being at odds with the government and some Ministers have been openly critical of some of the court’s decisions. Nevertheless, the court’s remit is to ascertain the law relevant to the case which it has to decide and then to apply that law.

It is open to Parliament to amend the law if it feels that to be necessary. The proceedings in the Supreme Court of the U.K. Here you will see many of our finest lawyers arguing their cases before the Justices. You will see the justices testing the arguments through their questioning of counsel. This is a superb and welcome innovation. Below the Supreme Court comes the Court of Appeal which sits in two divisions: Criminal and Civil. The vast majority of cases actually finish either at this level or at lower levels. The Court of Appeal usually sits at the Royal Courts of Justice in The Strand, London but the court may sit elsewhere. Its judges are known as Lords (or Lady) Justices of Appeal. County Courts – are located at many places in England and Wales and have jurisdiction in many types of civil case though, as mentioned before, some civil cases must go to the High Court.

It is either in the County Court or at a Tribunal that the vast majority of civil cases will be heard. It is possible to appeal from the County Court to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Crown Court – deals with the most serious criminal cases which are heard by a Judge sitting with a Jury of twelve. There are various levels of judge. High Court Judges will preside over the most serious cases. Other levels of judiciary are Circuit Judges (many of whom take some very serious cases) and Recorders. The Crown Court also hears appeals from the Magistrates’ Courts – which are heard by a Judge sitting with two Justices of the Peace. Appeals just against the sentence imposed by Magistrates is also possible. The Magistrates’ Courts – hear criminal cases brought against adults and over 90% of those criminal cases brought to court are dealt with here.

A special Youth Court hears criminal cases brought against children and young persons. The Magistrates’ Courts are manned by “Justices of the Peace” (JPs) who do not have to be legally qualified but who are advised on points of law and procedure by a qualified legal adviser. There are about 30,000 JPs in England and Wales and this is an important and valuable involvement of the citizen with the administration of justice. The justices normally sit in panels of three. An increasing number of cases are now being heard by legally qualified District Judges (Magistrates Courts) who sit alone and have the full powers of the Magistrates’ Court. The Magistrates’ Courts have some civil jurisdiction. Mainly this is in Family Proceedings though family cases can be allocated, according to complexity, to the County Court or to the High Court. Magistrates will normally handle only the more straightforward of these cases. It is a matter for some regret that the number of Magistrates’ Courts is being reduced in order to make financial savings. Unfortunately, this entails victims of crime and witnesses having to travel further for their cases. Other courts – even the above is not a complete picture. There is a Court-Martial dealing with military matters. Ecclesiastical Courts exist to deal with the internal matters of the Church of England. To the “man in the street” this can appear to be a bewildering system. Much of it can only truly be explained by history and by the many and varied changes made by Parliament. Over the years old courts have disappeared – (such as Assizes and Quarter Sessions) – only to be replaced by new – (the Crown Court). It might be thought – why not have a single Civil Court and a single Criminal Court? This idea has been put forward occasionally but has not, so far, found general acceptance.

On Tuesday (November 20) morning, the bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SK Kaul and KM Joseph had resumed its proceedings in Verma’s petition challenging the Centre’s decision of divesting him of his responsibilities as CBI chief. Chief Justice Gogoi had, moments after the hearing commenced, asked Verma’s lead counsel, senior advocate Fali Nariman how confidential details related to the case were being published by sections of the media. Nariman had told the bench that the leaks were “unauthorized” and that the court could “summon the editors” for further information. Shortly after the bench adjourned the matter, Nariman approached the Chief Justice and apologized for the goings-on that had upset the court. The senior advocate then asked the Chief Justice to grant him some time to make certain clarifications. Thereafter, as Nariman, Sankarnarayanan and an advocate-on-record apparently engaged by Verma for the case appeared before the bench, Chief Justice Gogoi said: “We are unable to help you due to the inefficiency of the counsel. We want to know what is going on. This is a place for adjudication of legal rights, not a platform for people to come and express anything they want.

Senior advocate Sankarnarayanan then approached the bench stating: “I would like to clear my name”. Earlier in the day, Nariman had told the bench that Sankarnarayanan had not been authorized to approach the bench on Monday for seeking an extension for filing Verma’s response to the CVC inquiry report. While the bench declined to hear Sankarnarayanan’s clarification, another advocate-on-record (AoR) who had previously appeared for Verma told the bench that the CBI chief had authorized her and Sankarnarayanan to seek the extension. This set off a spat between Nariman and Sankarnarayanan. The Chief Justice then made it clear to the sparring lawyers that it was not inclined to hear anyone except Nariman. Nariman told the court that the mentioning done by Sankarnarayanan was wrong. The bench then also noted its displeasure over the publication of the petition filed by senior CBI officer MK Sinha challenging his transfer from the SIT probe into corruption cases against Rakesh Asthana. Sinha’s petition, filed earlier this week alleges that Doval was trying to shield Asthana in the corruption cases being investigated against the CBI special director. The claim was, obviously, reported widely in the Indian media. Sources say that much of what Sinha mentions in his petition is the same as what Verma has explained in his confidential reply to the CVC inquiry report. How the top court proceeds in the case when it comes up for hearing next on November 29 remains to be seen. What is certain, however, is that the mess emanating from the CBI turf war is only getting murkier and the Supreme Court is supremely angry over the fallout.

Whilst this process of denial of justice to ordinary people continues apace, it seems that the Supreme Court is getting ready for a NINE judge hearing about a pre-nuptial agreement signed in Germany. Does this matter really require a NINE member court? The case is Radmacher v Granatino and the Court of Appeal judgment may be seen here. ] EWCA Civ 908. The case concerned the confidentiality of information relating to the assets of divorcing couples. Paragraph 88 of the judgment, with the notion of spouses having separate studies, makes one wonder just which planet some of the judges live on. As ever, it is nice to know that justice, like the Ritz Hotel, is open to everyone. The previous Labour government started the hatchet job on magistrates’ courts and the axe has been taken up with relish by Kenneth Clarke. The vast majority of criminal cases are dealt with by the magistrates’ courts and access to such courts is essential.

The closures will mean that many victims and witnesses will have to travel further to get their cases heard. The extended travel distances will inevitably result in more people failing to turn up on the day especially if, as seems likely, the usual attention is paid to wintry conditions on the roads. The axeing of “local justice” will also have the effect of disengaging from the legal system those active citizens who care about things and who have been willing to give their time to serve as magistrates. Legal aid in magistrates’ courts is now at a minimal level since defendants have to pass both a means test AND an interests of justice test. There are many cases in which the interests of justice test is met but the defendant’s means exceed the very modest legal aid ceiling. Legal aid in the Crown Court is also means tested under a scheme of the Labour government which the new coalition allowed to continue. The Legal Services Commission is asking for comment about the implementation of this scheme. Prison does not work is the other Kenneth Clarke mantra. Of course, he was referring to short term prison sentences which it is claimed do little or nothing to rehabilitate offenders though society is given a short break from their activities. Short term prison sentences are expensive. The alternative is “community sentencing” but the various programmes have to be properly funded and resourced with experienced trained personnel.

10,000 fine as a sanction for misconduct under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in a copyright infringement case. Shortly after the defendant complained of Richard’s conduct to the court, the parties reached a voluntary settlement in the case. As a result of the complaint, the judge issued Richard an order to show cause why he should not be sanctioned. Judge Cote noted, however, that she received the defendant’s complaints about Richard’s misconduct and issued the order prior to the case’s formal dismissal or settlement. Instead, Richard had notified the court only that the parties had reached a settlement “in principle.” The case was not dismissed pursuant to the settlement until four weeks later. The judge accused Richard of a pattern of omissions and misrepresentations in the case and failing to adhere to standards expected of officers of the court. Additionally, Richard argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger (137 S. Ct. ’s inherent power be compensatory rather than punitive. Therefore, he claimed, the sanctions must be paid to the defendant based on the costs incurred as a result of the misconduct by plaintiff’s counsel. In Goodyear, the Court held that sanctions in the form of attorneys’ fees granted under a court’s inherent power must be limited to the fees incurred as a result of the offending behavior. But, Judge Cote noted, the Court held that attorneys’ fees are but one permissible sanction available when a court exercises its inherent powers, not the sole sanction. 10,000 sanction imposed here is not an award of attorneys’ fees to compensate the defendant,” the judge wrote. ] makes clear, the sanction is to be paid to the Clerk of Court. 2,000 and ordered Richard to attend a professional ethics course.

The recent surge of online Rummy game portals makes a strong case for the rising popularity of this interesting card game in India. Many Indians are well versed with the classic rummy game, also known as paplu in some parts of the country. Traditionally playing the game provided much needed entertainment because there were few other means available. It provided an option to strengthen friendships and make new ones. Technology is mostly a good thing. When you register with Rummy Passion, you’ve already done most of the work. You’ve gone ahead and played practice games with free chips and all. When are you going to take the next step and make a deposit? It’s the same as liking a girl but never asking her out. You keep waiting and practicing your moves, while another guy walks in and asks her out. All you can do at that point is look stumped.

Are you making the same mistake with Rummy? Are you waiting for others to come in and win cash while you look for time pass? Playing online Rummy is 100% legal in India. As long as you are playing in INR and you are a legal resident of India, you’re good to go. The only exception is that residents of the states of Odisha and Assam cannot play cash or free games as the state regulatory authorities in these two states do not allow it. The Supreme Court of India over a period of time has issued many verdicts to clearly state that in India, Rummy is legal because Rummy is a game of skill and not chance. Rummy Passion uses a state of the art SSL technology to secure player data and transactions. All critical information is encrypted at all times. Payment gateways that process your banking transactions are trusted brands and you can be rest assured that your money is safe here. This is the best time to learn the game.

It is a mathematical game, no doubt but it’s quite straight forward. There are a few simple rules which you can familiarize yourself with in little time. Reading blogs on tips and tricks will help. Watching free tutorial videos is most effective as you learn by observing a real game in progress. Visual wisdom is easy to gain and takes about 6 to 8 minutes only. If you miss a part, you can watch the video over again! Rummy Gyan is easy to understand and follow. Besides entertainment and a chance to make some money, online rummy at Rummy Passion gets you some extra benefits. You get loyalty points with the Passion Rewards Club which you can redeem for exciting shopping and bonuses. Enrollment to this program is free and automatic when you play real money games. Of course as you upgrade to higher tiers, you will gain more. Besides the loyalty program, you can avail a special bonus on Sundays or play tournaments. Freeroll, cash and buy in tournaments are a fun way to play and win. Don’t wait for the world to pass you by. Opportunity knocks on every door, but it doesn’t wait outside forever!