Supreme Court Sample Clauses
A Supreme Court clause designates the Supreme Court of a particular jurisdiction as the final authority for resolving disputes arising under the agreement. In practice, this means that if parties are unable to resolve their disagreements through lower courts or other dispute resolution mechanisms, the matter may ultimately be appealed to and decided by the Supreme Court. This clause ensures that there is a clear, definitive forum for final adjudication, providing certainty and finality in the resolution of legal disputes.
POPULAR SAMPLE Copied 2 times
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court shall adjudicate all matters arising out of the elections during the transition, in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the country.
Supreme Court. Records and Briefs-California (State). Number of Exhibits: 1 Leases & Rental Agreements-▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2017-08-30 Anyone who owns or manages residential real estate, anywhere in the U.S., should buy this book, as it provides a solid lease, that can be tailored to the laws of a specific state, and the key rental documents needed to start a tenancy.
Supreme Court. The SC held that the arbitration clause is contained in the standard terms and conditions contained in the attachment to the contract.
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may exercise jurisdiction in relation to the commission and the commissioners in the same way and to the same extent as it could if the commission were a body representing the Territory and the commissioners were Territory officers.
Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court has embraced the principle of the pre- disciplinary interview as required due process when an employee may be disciplined. In Case No. 470 U.S. 532, Justice Whit▇, ▇▇eaking for the majority, stated: THE ARBITRATORS
Supreme Court. In Nebraska Department of Revenue v. L▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇5 ▇. ▇▇. ▇▇▇ (▇▇94), the Supreme Court held that a mutual fund which entered into a repurchase transaction was not to be viewed as owning the underlying federal securities but as having made a loan to the holder of such securities for purposes of state taxation of the interest income. The Supreme Court did not dispute the contention of the mutual fund that repos are treated as purchases and sales for purposes of federal securities law, bankruptcy law, banking law as well as commercial and local government law or any other body of law but limited its holding to characterizing the interest as taxable or tax-exempt for Nebraska state law purposes. Furthermore, nothing in the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution or other applicable law directed the Court to consider the provisions of the 1940 Act. Accordingly, the Court's holding in Nebraska Department of Revenue is not applicable to the determination whether the Repos should be viewed as Government securities for purposes of the 75 percent asset test.
Supreme Court. 4. Uiteindelijk moest het Supreme Court6 van het Vere- nigd Koninkrijk zich over de zaak buigen. Wegens het belang van de zaak voor de internationale arbitragewereld kwamen de bekende arbitrage-instellingen LCIA (London
5. Het Supreme Court erkende dat er een contractuele relatie bestaat tussen arbiters en partijen, via dewelke arbi- ters hun diensten verlenen. Op de vraag of er in deze relatie sprake is van ‘employment’ in de zin van de antidiscrimina- tiewetgeving in arbeidszaken, antwoordde het Supreme Court negatief, omdat de rol van de arbiter van nature uit niet zo wordt omschreven.
6. Bij wijze van intellectuele uitstap ging het Supreme Court nog na of, indien de bewuste antidiscriminatiewetge- ving toch van toepassing zou zijn, de vereiste religieuze kwalificaties van de arbiters geoorloofd zouden zijn. Het Supreme Court oordeelde dat dit het geval was en steunde zich daarbij op één van de basisbeginselen van arbitrage, met name de ruime keuzevrijheid die aan partijen wordt gegeven om de arbitrageprocedure in te richten. In een concurring opinion betwijfelt Lord ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ dat het opleggen van religieuze vereisten aan arbiters gerechtvaardigd of propor- tioneel is.
Supreme Court