Leave to Appeal Decision Due Thursday May 5, 2011 re CMEC ,etc
The Supreme Court will announce this Thursday, May 5, 2011 at 9:45 AM whether it will hear an appeal in the CMEC (Province of Alberta et al) K-12 case, which involves the very important issue of whether material prescribed by a teacher or provided in multiple copies can be fair dealing. The CMEC Leave to Appeal application is attached. This is the other side of the coin to the SOCAN previews case, which the Court has already decided to hear but together with two other cases involving the unrelated "communication to the public" issue. In the previews case, the Federal Court of Appeal looked at the "purpose" of the user. In the latter, the Federal Court of Appeal refused to do so. The decisions are only a few weeks apart but emanate from different panels of the Federal Court of Appeal. The results are frankly not readily reconcilable. I'm hoping that the CMEC case gets heard, but the Supreme Court has already decided to hear three other copyright cases this year. That this is certainly stating out as an eventful week. If most of the #elxn41 polls are anywhere near accurate, the NDP is likely to have a much bigger role to play in any successor to Bill C-32. Get ready for more and more debate about #ipodtax. Howard
Read more detail on Recent Copyright Posts –
Legal notice about the Leave to Appeal Decision Due Thursday May 5, 2011 re CMEC ,etc
rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.
Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Leave to Appeal Decision Due Thursday May 5, 2011 re CMEC ,etc?
- Application by the County of Norfolk for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada declined
- Florida AG declines to appeal decision striking down gay adoption ban
- California Court of Appeal Issues A Contrary Decision Addressing “Vested Rights” of Public Employees in the Aftermath of PEPRA: Where Will the Supreme Court Land?
- Can I Appeal a Decision Before the Case is Over?
- Unsatisfactory rating voided because employee's "performance review," failed to comply with the employer's own procedures and thus undermined the integrity of the process Joyce v City of New York, 2018 NY Slip Op 03433, Appellate Division, First Department The Appellate Division annulled the determination of respondent New York City Department of Education [DOE] sustaining the "unsatisfactory" rating for the 2010-2011 academic year give to John Joyce, a tenured teacher. The court said that the record demonstrates "deficiencies in the performance review process" that resulted in Mr. Joyce being given an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year. Citing Matter of Gumbs v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 125 AD3d 484, and Matter of Richards v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 117 AD3d 605, the Appellate Division noted that these deficiencies "were not merely technical, but undermined the integrity and fairness of the process." Mr. Joyce had received a satisfactory rating for the previous academic year and, in contravention of its own procedures, DOE failed to place him on notice that he was in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year until after April 28, 2011. Although DOE's procedures required that tenured teachers in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating have "formal observations including a pre-observation and post-observation conference by the principal … as part of a prescriptive plan to improve their teaching," Mr. Joyce received only one formal observation which took place one week before the end of the academic year and was not part of a prescriptive plan to improve his performance as a teacher. The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2018/2018_03433.htm
- Should there be (and will there be) an appeal of federal judge's imposition of "shorter sentence because … of [defendant's] decision to be sterilized"?
- British Columbia Court of Appeal Upholds Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal decision regarding passengers’ rights to sue for damages resulting from an aircraft accident
- Thursday Thingies
- Fair Dealing, Standard of Review and Possible Interventions at the Supreme Court of Canada
- Competition Law Lecture by José Luis da Cruz Vilaça, Thursday 14 December
This entry was posted in Copyright Law
and tagged 2011
. Bookmark the permalink