Law Firm

News Channel 3-12 is committed to providing a forum for civil and constructive conversation.

Please keep your

How Sackett Will Hurt Endangered Species In California

And what the state can do about it

Others have already posted about the Supreme Court’s Sackett decision that significantly cuts back on the geographic scope of the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulation protecting wetlands. Understandably, there has been a lot of attention to the direct effects of that change, which means that federal permitting will no longer apply to many wetlands in the United States. In California, the state government has argued that because of California state law protecting wetlands, Sackett will have much less of an impact in California than elsewhere.

Not quite.

That’s because environmental laws often operate in interconnected ways. The narrowing of the scope of Section 404 regulation does not just mean wetlands will receive less protection under the Clean Water Act. It also means many endangered species will receive less protection under the federal Endangered

Governments are calling for a ban on new gTLD contention sets being settled via private auctions, a practice that allowed many tens of millions of dollars to change hands in the last application round.

ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee said in its ICANN 77 communique that it formally advises ICANN: “To ban or strongly disincentivize private monetary means of resolution of contention sets, including private auctions.”

Private auctions typically see the losers split the winner’s winning bid among themselves. The GAC endorsed the At-Large Advisory Committee’s recommendation that applicants should be forced to ICANN-run “last resort” auctions, where ICANN gets all the money, instead.

The concern is that companies with no intention of actually operating a gTLD will file applications purely in order to have a tradable asset that can be sold to competing applicants for huge profits.

In the 2012 round, 224 sets of contention were settled in private, often

This appeal relates to the interpretation of the Immigration Rules, in particular the Tier 1 (Investor) Migrant regime (as in force in December 2017 – it has since been closed). This regime was designed to grant leave to remain to high-net-worth individuals making a substantial financial contribution to the UK. To qualify individuals were required to have £1 million (of either their own money or money borrowed from a UK-regulated financial institution) under their control in the UK. They must also have invested at least £750,000 of such sum in the UK through UK Government bonds or in shares in or loans to active and trading UK-registered companies (subject to certain further restrictions and exclusions).

Ms Wang is an individual who (among over 100 others) subscribed to a scheme designed to ensure qualification for leave to remain under the Tier 1 (Investor) Migrant regime. Under this scheme Ms Wang borrowed

The Riddles of the Maldives

The Maldives is one of the nations most vulnerable to rising sea levels. So, why is climate change not a topic of discussion here?

It was the site for one of the most iconic climate policy photos. In the run-up to the Copenhagen climate negotiations in 2009, President Mohamed Nasheed held a cabinet meeting in scuba gear 20 feet underwater to show what awaited the low-lying island nation of the Maldives if serious action were not taken to reduce greenhouse gases. Nasheed followed up with a pledge that the Maldives would be the first carbon neutral country by 2020. The photo went viral and made clear the threat from rising sea levels to low-lying island nations.

An archipelago of small islands south of Sri Lanka, the Maldives is the flattest country on earth, the average height of land is just four feet above sea level.

Age discrimination has been an area of ​​some discussion with human resources and people and culture teams with concerns over fitness for work, use of technology, physical ability and ability to adapt and change are brought into question. There are of course some positions where there are specific legal obligations around age retirement. However, in Australia most discrimination cases have been battled out in general protections claims or state discrimination cases.

The Federal Court of Australia case of Gutierrez v MUR Shipping Australia Pty Limited (No 2) [2023] FCA 567 now represents a landmark for age discrimination in the federal space as a now 73 year old accountant has taken on his Employer and won a substantial payout of $232,000. Confirming he did suffer loss, he was treated less favorably and his feelings were hurt.

Age Discrimination

Age discrimination is a form of unfair treatment that occurs when an employee

Funding Public Transit Is Crucial for California’s Climate Goals

Transit networks need more–not less–support for the state to achieve 2045 carbon neutrality

It has been widely reported in recent weeks that California’s public transit systems are seeking dollars of support from the state budget to avoid the fiscal cliff they are facing due to slow ridership recovery following the pandemic and shifts in work commute patterns. Without this support, the agencies will need to begin service cuts that will erode ridership further, leading to a potential ridership/revenue/service death spiral. Legislative leaders offered a compromise on Monday that would cover approximately $4 billion of the $6 billion anticipated deficit.

Local and (many) state leaders want to prevent this death spiral, most importantly because of the impact it would have on the millions of Californians who depend on public transit to get to work, school and services. Cuts to transit service would

In this post, Isabel Emerson, Senior Associate, and Anna Walsh, Partner, in the Clinical Risk and Medical Advisory and Professional Discipline and Regulatory team at CMS preview the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (2 ) Polmear and Anor v Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust and (3) Purchase v Ahmed

These three conjoined appeals were heard by the Supreme Court on 16 – 18 May 2023.

These are three deeply tragic cases, each relating to a claim by a close relative (a secondary victim) for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing, or attending shortly after, the death of a loved one (the primary victim), where the death was allegedly caused by the defendant’s earlier clinical negligence.

The issue for the Supreme Court to determine is whether the necessary legal proximity exists between a defendant and a secondary victim where the alleged clinical