TAGStheconversation.com Previous article50% of Floridians have unused vacation daysNext articleThe State of The Apopka Voice Denise Connell RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Please enter your name here Last night’s moon was an orange shade and was prettier than the moon that was suppose to be so special, that I got up early to view. Support conservation and fish with NEW Florida specialty license plate Mama Mia Please enter your comment! Free webinar for job seekers on best interview answers, hosted by Goodwill June 11 2 COMMENTS The Anatomy of Fear Editor’s Note – This article was first published on theconversation.com. I was up at 6:02 am and went and looked out the window at the moon, and it was extremely bright, and very white, and fairly large, but not the largest I had ever seen, for sure. It was so bright I could see everything on the street. I went back to sleep, so I don’t know what it looked like later around 6:48 to 7:00 am. Reply Share on Facebook Tweet on Twitter January 31, 2018 at 8:32 pm Mama Mia Reply LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply You have entered an incorrect email address! Please enter your email address here Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. February 2, 2018 at 10:14 am By Shannon Schmoll, Director of the Abrams Planetarium, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State UniversityEditor’s Note: According to space.com, the super blue blood full moon should be most visible in the Apopka sky between 6:48 AM – 7:51 AM Wednesday morning.During the early hours of January 31st, there will be a full moon, a total lunar eclipse, a blue moon and a supermoon – all at the same time. None of these things is really all that unusual by itself. What is rare is that they’re happening all together on one day.What makes the moon look full?Like the Earth, half the moon is illuminated by the sun at any one time. The moon orbits around the Earth and as a result we see different amounts of the lit-up side.The phases of the moon visible from Earth are related to its revolution around our planet. Orion 8, CC BY-SAA full moon is when we see its entire lit-up side. This occurs every 29.5 days, when the moon is directly opposite the sun relative to the Earth. Jan. 31 will be our next full moon in the lunar cycle.What’s a lunar eclipse?The moon’s orbit is tilted by about 5 degrees relative to the Earth’s orbit. So, most of the time the moon ends up a little above or below the path Earth follows as it revolves around the sun. But twice in each lunar cycle, the moon does cross into our planet’s orbital plane.A lunar eclipse happens when the moon is completely in the Earth’s shadow. Tomruen, CC BY-SAIf that crossing corresponds to a full moon, the moon will pass into the Earth’s shadow, resulting in a total lunar eclipse. Since the moon needs to be behind the Earth, relative to the sun, a lunar eclipse can only happen on a full moon.To see the phenomenon, you need to be on the night side of the Earth; this eclipse will be visible mostly in Asia, Australia, the Pacific and North America. But don’t worry if you miss it, lunar eclipses happen on average a couple times a year. The next one visible in North America will be on Jan. 21, 2019.A blue moon that looks redWhen a lunar eclipse happens, the moon appears to darken as it moves into the Earth’s shadow called the umbra. When the moon is all the way in shadow it doesn’t go completely dark; instead, it looks red due to a process called Rayleigh scattering. The gas molecules of Earth’s atmosphere scatter bluer wavelengths of light from the sun, while redder wavelengths pass straight through.This is why we have blue skies and red sunrises and sunsets. When the sun is high in the sky, red light passes straight through to the ground while blue light is scattered in every direction, making it more likely to hit your eye when you look around. During a sunset, the angle of the sun is lower in the sky and that red light instead passes directly into your eyes while the blue light is scattered away from your line of sight.A super blood moon tinted red by scattered light. GSFC, CC BYIn the case of a lunar eclipse, the sunlight that makes it around Earth passes through our atmosphere and is refracted toward the moon. Blue light is filtered out, leaving the moon looking reddish during an eclipse.On top of it all, the Jan. 31 full moon is also a considered a blue moon. There are two different definitions of blue moon. The first is any time a second full moon occurs in a single month. Since there are 29.5 days between two full moons, we usually only end up with one per month. With most months longer than 29.5 days, it occasionally works out that we have two full moons. We already had one on the first of this month and our second will be Jan. 31, making it a blue moon. With this definition our next blue moon is in March, leaving February with no full moon this year.The second definition of a blue moon states it’s the third moon in a season in which there are four moons, which happens about every 2.7 years. We’ll only have three this winter, so the Jan. 31 full moon won’t be blue by this definition. Stargazers will need to wait until May 18, 2019, for a blue moon that fits this older, original definition.A supersized supermoonFinally, to add the cherry on top, this will also be a supermoon. The moon’s orbit is not perfectly circular, meaning its distance from Earth varies as it goes through one cycle. The closest point in its orbit is called the perigee. A full moon that happens near perigee is called a supermoon by some.This happened with our full moon earlier this month on Jan. 1 and will again on Jan. 31.Appearance of an ‘average’ moon versus a supermoon. Marcoaliaslama, CC BY-SAIts proximity makes it seem a little bit bigger and brighter than usual, but that’s the extent of its effects on Earth. The distinction is usually hard to notice unless you’re looking at two pictures side by side.There are long traditions of giving different moons names. This being a bigger, brighter, reddish-looking blue moon, perhaps we should call the next full moon the super purple moon. The moon will not actually appear purple, nor will have it a cape – but Jan. 31 is a great time to gaze up and enjoy the night sky.
France Area: 105 m²Text description provided by the architects. The plot is located outside the center of the village commune Charentilly not visible from the tower of the church, it is in the area of protection of historical monuments.Save this picture!Courtesy of Jean-Charles LiddellRecommended ProductsDoorspanoramah!®ah! PivotWoodBruagBalcony BalustradesDoorsLonghiDoor – HeadlineEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesIsland Exterior FabricatorsCurtain Wall Facade SystemsLocated in a subdivision in progress, the developed land, a field in fact has a steep incline (down in a South-North). Access to land is high in part on the south side. Save this picture!Courtesy of Jean-Charles LiddellThe environment consists of fields constructible west side, a wooded area on the north side and not building a house under construction on the east side Save this picture!Courtesy of Jean-Charles LiddellContemporary, this house is a hybrid, fitting perfectly into the future suburban fabric, it takes advantage of the steep terrain, while framing the magnificent views of the site (north). This house is based on the typology of our barns (large roofs, and long forms of openings on the facades dotted with large portals) to adapt the program to a house in a rather unusual site. The house is actually a series of « pignons » “porous” for four numbers: Both the garage (wood frame in Douglas clear voice) and two of the house (wood frame with glass embedded in Larch).Project gallerySee allShow lessPlastics in Architecture and Engineering at Columbia GSAPPArticlesAin Ghazal Interpretation Park / Rasem KamalArticles Share CopyAbout this officeRVL architectsOfficeFollowProductWood#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesWoodHousesCharentillyFrancePublished on March 24, 2011Cite: “House in Charentilly / RVL architects” 24 Mar 2011. ArchDaily. Accessed 12 Jun 2021.
134 total views, 2 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis15 1. Start earlyFundraisers start early. People who create their page 107 days before the race raise an average of just under £250 more – with a page average total of £2,166.Some charities are already starting their 2018 London Marathon campaigns. For example, WellChild has launched its Marathon Campaign Hub to bring together all their marathon runners and their totals in one place. 2. Use the platform’s featuresSuccessful fundraisers use more of JustGiving’s toolbox of fundraising features, specifically, and in order of importance:JustGiving’s Mobile appsetting a fundraising targetadding a profile pictureposting photos.People that use all four features raised 198% more than those who used none.3. Use JustTextGivingOn average, fundraisers who used JustTextGiving with their traditional fundraising page raised £200 more than those who did not use this option. 133 total views, 1 views today JustGiving reports that it handled £2.3 million in donations over the weekend of the London Marathon in April, an increase of 11% on the previous year.Overall, the 13,000 runners who used JustGiving as their fundraising platform for the London Marathon 2017 raised a total of £22.9 million for charities and good causes, an increase of 3% on the previous year.The figures were announced by Keith Williams, General Manager ofJustGiving, at the Institute of Fundraising’s Community Fundraising Conference 2017 in London.London Marathon pages outperform other marathonsWilliams revealed that London Marathon runners typically raise more on the site than participants in other marathons. The average amount raised by a London Marathon runner on JustGiving was £1,919, an increase on 6% on the previous year. The average page value of other marathon events on the site is of £1,226.At the peak of activity, JustGiving was processing three donations every second. A record (at that point) 16,000 people were using the site at the same time. A total of 1.4 million people visited the site during the weekend.Mobile continues to dominate activity on JustGiving. During the day of the London Marathon itself, 88% of its traffic came from mobiles.What makes a successful fundraising page?Williams told delegates that the most successful fundraising pages on the platform had a combination of three traits. Advertisement Tagged with: Events Justgiving London marathon Research / statistics Donations following Manchester attack set new recordJustGiving subsequently experienced heavy use following the establishment of the We Love Manchester appeal by the British Red Cross and Mayor of Manchester following the terrorist bombing last month.The site handled 36,000 concurrent visitors who were donating a total of £200 a second to support the families and victims. Keith Williams commented that this involved a peak donation of seven donations a second, adding “this broke all our previous records”. Howard Lake | 5 June 2017 | News AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis15 £2.3m donated on JustGiving over London Marathon weekend About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving.
Home Indiana Agriculture News Indiana Farm Bureau Stressing Priorities as Legislative Session Begins Indiana Farm Bureau Stressing Priorities as Legislative Session BeginsRandy KronIndiana Farm Bureau members came to the Statehouse on Wednesday to meet with lawmakers to stress their priorities for the new legislative session. The Legislative Kickoff Lunch drew a record large crowd of farmers and legislators. Lively discussions centered around several key issues. Dane Chatman, from White County, said the lawmakers at his table were receptive to what he had to say, “We talked about the state budget and roads and infrastructure, broadband to the last mile. The legislator really seemed to listen to what we had to say.”IFB President Randy Kron said HB 1002 which deals with funding for infrastructure is one that Farm Bureau can get behind, “Roads are what we need to get our crops to market, so this is a vital issue for us. We are going to be watching the House bill closely as well as what the Senate does.”The measure faces some opposition because it calls for an increase in the gas tax. Kron said this is one tax Farm Bureau would like to see increased, “It is more of a user-based funding plan, and Farm Bureau supports user-based funding plans.”Broadband is another important issue for rural Indiana, but some lawmakers felt this is a federal issue. Kron disagrees, “We just need to get something done. Where I live we are only slightly more advanced than two tin cans and a string.” He related how we was unable to send his field maps to the company they use because the connection was too slow.Rep Brown (left) Sen Hershmen (right)Keynote speakers at the lunch included LG-elect Suzanne Crouch, who promised to work with Farm Bureau on key legislative priorities. She also promised strong pushback against overreach by federal government regulations such as the WOTUS rule. Also appearing before the group was Tim Brown, chair of the House Ways and Means committee, and Senator Brent Hershman, chair of the Senate Tax committee. Both men stated their support for rural road funding. By Gary Truitt – Jan 4, 2017 SHARE SHARE Indiana Farm Bureau Stressing Priorities as Legislative Session Begins Facebook Twitter Facebook Twitter Previous articleImproved Restricted Class B CDL Policy Provides Greater FlexibilityNext articleVilsack Expected to Become U.S. Dairy Export Council President Gary Truitt
News “The authorities have shown they will no longer content themselves with just arresting and convicting in order to put pressure on human rights activists and those who contest President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Today they have demonstrated that they intend to actually execute Mohareb. There is great danger that there will be more executions. How many deaths will be needed for the international community to intervene?” March 18, 2021 Find out more IranMiddle East – North Africa RSF_en Call for Iranian New Year pardons for Iran’s 21 imprisoned journalists Organisation Iran: Press freedom violations recounted in real time January 2020 Other bloggers who are members of the committee have also been arrested in recent weeks: Parisa Kakei was arrested on 2 January; Shiva Nazar Ahari was arrested on 24 December; and Said Kanaki and Said Jalali were arrested on 1 December. They are all still being held in Section 209 of Tehran’s Evin prison and are being subjected to considerable pressure to name other members of the committee and to call for it to be disbanded. After Hengameh Shahidi’s pardon, RSF asks Supreme Leader to free all imprisoned journalists June 9, 2021 Find out more Tehran state prosecutor Abass Jafari Dolatabadi declared on 22 January that this committee was an offshoot of the outlawed People’s Mujahedeen Organisation and that any collaboration with its website was therefore banned. January 28, 2010 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Two bloggers face possible death penalty to go further IranMiddle East – North Africa Receive email alerts Two netizens and human rights activists, Mehrdad Rahimi and Kouhyar Goudarzi, have been accused of wanting to wage “a war against God,” in a similar manner to the two men who were executed this morning in Tehran on charges of “Mohareb” (being enemies of God). Both contributors to an opposition website, Rahimi and Goudarzi are also facing a possible death penalty. Help by sharing this information Reporters Without Borders also warns Iranians about the “mirror-sites” being used by the authorities to trap Internet users. Imitating the websites of foreign political organisation and news media, they invite visitors to send emails and videos about demonstrations or to post comments, and are used by the authorities to gather evidence to support charges of spying for foreign organisations. Reporters Without Borders has meanwhile learned that Mansoureh Shojaii, a contributor to women’s rights websites, and Mohammed Reza Zohdi, the former editor of the now-closed newspaper Arya, a member of the Committee for the Defence of Press Freedom and a contributor to several reformist newspapers, were both released from Section 209 of Evin prison on 23 December. Shojaii had been held for 22 days while Zohdi had been held for 19 days. News News Rahimi, who edits the Shahidayeshahr blog, and Goudarzi, who keeps his own blog (http://kouhyar.wordpress.com/), are both members of the “Committee of Human Rights Reporters,” which was created by students and bloggers to relay information about the crackdown that followed the disputed 12 June presidential election. Follow the news on Iran News February 25, 2021 Find out more
ColumnsLaw On Return And Rejection Vis-a-Vis Amendment Of The Plaint: Dichotomy In The Judicial Approach Manav Gupta & Ankit Gupta22 Aug 2020 4:15 AMShare This – xA ‘Plaint’ is the very foundation of a civil Suit. It is the bedrock that brings out the necessary facts which form the basis for the Courts to adjudicate upon the dispute. A Suit is said to be instituted on the date of presentation of the Plaint and it is solely on the basis of the averments in the Plaint that the primary questions of Jurisdiction and Maintainability are…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginA ‘Plaint’ is the very foundation of a civil Suit. It is the bedrock that brings out the necessary facts which form the basis for the Courts to adjudicate upon the dispute. A Suit is said to be instituted on the date of presentation of the Plaint and it is solely on the basis of the averments in the Plaint that the primary questions of Jurisdiction and Maintainability are adjudicated upon. While returning a finding on the issue of Jurisdiction, the Court has to see whether it has the requisite Territorial and Pecuniary Jurisdiction to entertain the Suit. If the said issue is answered in the negative, the Court exercises its powers under Order VII Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) and ‘Return the Plaint’ for it to be presented to the Court in which the Suit should have been originally instituted, with the necessary Territorial and Pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. Similarly, while adjudicating upon the issue of Maintainability, the Court has to decide whether the rigours of Order VII Rule 11 CPC are attracted or not. In the event the Court finds that the Plaint is hit by any of the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the Court rejects the Plaint. It is settled law that an order of Rejection/Return of Plaint does not attract the Principle of Res-Judicata and therefore, does not act as a complete bar to seek relief in respect of the same cause of action as originally claimed in the Plaint. In appropriate cases, the plaintiff has an option to re-file the Plaint after carrying out the necessary changes and modifications in the averments in the Plaint so as to save it from the rigours of order VII Rule 11 CPC. It would, therefore, be safe to say that neither an order under Order VII Rule 10 CPC nor an order under Order VII Rule 11 CPC puts the dispute to an end as it is not an adjudication on the merits of the case. However, one may consider that the procedure of filing – rejection/return – re-filing subjects a litigant to a tedious and cumbersome task of re-filing the entire suit and inevitably results in wastage of resources, time and effort. Ergo, it brings us to the question that in a bid to save the Plaint from being Rejected/Returned, can the provision of Order VI Rule 17 CPC be invoked? Order VI Rule 17 CPC allows a party, at any stage of the proceedings,to make such amendments which are necessary for adjudication of the dispute. The Courts initially grappled with the question whether the benefit of amendment of pleadings can be allowed even when an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was pending before it. The Delhi High Court in Wasudhir Foundation v. C. Lal & Sons answered in the following terms:- “..After all what is the effect of Order 7 rule 11? It is, if I understand correctly, that the plaintiff would not be precluded from filing fresh suit in respect of the same cause of action. If such be the effect, why not permit the amendment of the plaint so as to remove the defect and prevent the operation of the Rule? Why make him first invite the rejection of the plaint, then allow him to file a fresh suit at the expense of delay and heavy cost? Why not straightway allow him to amend the plaint, remove the defect and permit him, thereby, to proceed with the same suit? Why this rigmarole? After all, procedural law is intended to facilitate and not to obstruct the course of justice…. The ouster of Order VI, Rule 17 will throttle the very life line of Order VII, Rule 11. Instead of promoting, it would defeat the ends of justice. I refuse to be a party to such an approach. Order VI, Rule 17 is thus held to be neither restricted nor controlled by Order VII, Rule 11.” Thereafter the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in a more recent judgment in the case of Archie Comic Publications Inc v. Purple Creations Pvt. Ltd and Ors., while relying on the ratio of Wasudhir Foundation, dismissed the application seeking amendment of Plaint and allowed the application seeking Rejection of the Plaint. In the facts of the said case, the Plaintiff had sought to invoke the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court as it claimed to be carrying on business in Delhi through its distributor i.e. a book store in Delhi which had been importing books from the Plaintiff since 1979. The Court came to the conclusion that it did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. It noted that even if the amendment application was indeed allowed, since the Plaintiff company was based out of New York and did not have any office in India, let alone in Delhi, the Delhi High Court could not be said to possess the necessary Territorial jurisdiction. The Division Bench opined as follows:- “As is evident, Variety Book Store is not the special agent of the Appellant. The Appellant has no control over the working of Variety Book Store. Thus, in view of the legal position, enunciated above, it cannot be said that the plaintiff carries on business or was personally working at Delhi thus, vesting a jurisdiction in this Court to entertain the plaint.…In our view, if the plaint disclosed some facts, which may however, be incomplete to vest territorial jurisdiction in the Court, the Court would entertain an Application for amendment of pleadings. This is more so, as such an amendment would not set up a new case. However, if no facts are disclosed qua territorial jurisdiction then the defect cannot be even cured by amendment and in such a case an Application for amendment cannot be entertained. Indubitably, at this stage the Respondent’s response cannot be looked into. However, on merits in the present case, as discussed above, even taking the pleadings and documents annexed thereto by way of amendment this Court has not territorial jurisdiction to entertain the plaint.” In light of the aforesaid judgments, it is clear that the stage at which the application seeking amendment is moved is immaterial and it can be moved in the face of an earlier pending application seeking Rejection of the Plaint. The Courts above have construed the interplay of Order VII Rule 11 CPC and Order VI Rule 17 CPC to achieve the objectives with which the provision for amendment of pleadings is provided for in the CPC i.e. to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, to save precious judicial time and avoid expenses for the litigants. It is no longer res integra that the provision of Order VI Rule 17 CPC has to be construed liberally and allowing an application for amendment should be the norm rather than an exception. In Mount Mary Enterprises v. Jivratna Medi Treat Ltd. the Apex Court held that an amendment application should be normally granted unless by virtue of the amendment, the nature of the suit is changed or some prejudice is caused to the defendant. The Apex Court in Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building Material Supply, Gurgaon has held that the rules of procedure are intended to be a handmaid to the administration of justice and amendments cannot be refused merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the rules of procedure by a party. Moreover, in Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram, the Apex Court held that defective pleadings were generally curable till the time the cause of action sought to be brought in was not an entirely new or inconsistent cause of action, virtually amounting to the substitution of a new plaint or a new cause of action. In Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal and Ors. v. K.K. Modi and Ors. the Court while considering an application for amendment had pobserved that the Courts should not go into the correctness or falsity of the amendment. Likewise, the Court should also not record a finding on the merit of the amendment and the merits of the amendment sought to be incorporated by way of an amendment are not to be adjudged at the stage of allowing the prayer for amendment. The Courts have been consistent in their view that ordinarily under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, all amendments are ought to be allowed which satisfy two conditions (a) of not working injustice to the other side and (b) of being necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties.It has also been held that in a case of unclear or ambiguous pleadings, the same may be allowed to be amended to clarify the already pleaded facts till the same does not give rise to addition of a new cause of action. Further in Bhatia Industries and Ors. v. Pandey Industries and Ors., the Delhi High Court held that it is a settled proposition of law that Courts should allow all amendments, which are necessary for determining the matters in controversy between the parties since the object of the Court is to decide the right of the parties and not to punish them for the mistake they make in conduct of their cases. While the Courts have been forthcoming and generous in allowing applications seeking amendment of pleadings in the face of an application pending under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, they seem to have not followed the same path in allowing applications seeking amendment of pleadings before deciding an application under Order VII Rule 10 CPC. In the case of HSIL v. Imperial Ceramic, the Delhi High Court dismissed an application moved by plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to bring forth certain additional facts in support of the earlier pleaded cause of action and simultaneously allowed the application under Order VII Rule 10 CPC. While acknowledging that the amendment application, if allowed, would have the effect of rendering the application seeking Return of Plaint infructuous, the Hon’ble Court proceeded to disallow the said amendment application stating inter alia that once the Plaint failed to disclose the Territorial Jurisdiction in its favour, it cannot assume jurisdiction to entertain/allow an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC and has to mandatorily Return the Plaint. The relevant portion has been reproduced hereinunder:- “21. Thus, if the plaint in these suits as it exists, does not disclose this Court to be having territorial jurisdiction, then the only option for this Court is to return/reject the plaint and this Court would not have jurisdiction to even consider the application of the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint and which amendment, if allowed, would disclose the plaint as having necessary averments for his Court to give jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 22. The counsel for the plaintiff has contended that the plaintiff, even after return/rejection of the plaint, would be entitled to sue the defendants afresh in this Court only by making the averments in the fresh plaint to be filed, averments which are sought to be made by way of amendment in these pending suits. It is argued that once it is so, this Court should not, on account of technicality, compel the plaintiff to follow the said procedure… 23. Though undoubtedly so but once the law is found to be aforesaid, I cannot, in the name of “technicalities being not allowed to come in the way of justice” violate the law or decide contrary to law…” Significantly, by solely relying on this judgment, more than 10 Suits were returned by different benches of the Delhi High Court! Consequentially, Plaints in all those suits were re-filed after carrying out the amendments as were originally sought when application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC was moved. it is interesting to note that that in all the Suits that were re-filed, not only were summons issued and jurisdiction exercised, but fresh injunctions were also granted by the Delhi High Court. In my view, by taking the aforesaid view the Courts have negated the settled position of law that procedural law is not a tyrant but a servant, not an obstruction but an aid to justice. An artificial distinction has been created by the Courts between Return of Plaint and Rejection of Plaint without rationalising the difference in approach. It can also be seen that by putting the clock back to zero, no real purpose was served besides burdening the Courts with multiple rounds of litigation and enormous capital expenditure at the hands of the plaintiff. This entire rigmarole could have been avoided by adopting a similar view while dealing with an application under Order VII Rule 10 CPC and thereby not rendering the entire purpose of Order VI Rule 17 CPC otiose. Views are personal only.(Mr. Manav Gupta is Delhi based lawyer practising at the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India. Mr. Ankit Gupta is an advocate associated with the chambers of the Adv. Manav Gupta) Wasudhir Foundation v C. Lal & Sons., 1991 (45) DLT 556 [Wasudhir].  172 (2010) DLT 234 [Archie Comic]. Usha International v. Usha Television Limited, 2002 (25) PTC 184 (Del) (DB). (2015) 4 SCC 182. AIR 1969 SC 1267.  (1978) 2 SCR 614. AIR 2006 SC 1647. Vatika Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. Vatika Grand, (2009) 40 PTC 111 (Del). Archie Comic Publications Inc v. Purple Creations Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., 2010 (44) PTC 520 (Del). 180(2011)DLT167. 2018  PTC 556 [Del] Next Story
Joe Raedle/Getty Images(ST. PETERSBURG, Fla.) — Local Florida officials are voicing their outrage over Gov. Ron DeSantis’ suspension of all local COVID-19 emergency orders — with the St. Petersburg mayor warning his county may never hit herd immunity.The Republican governor issued the executive order Monday, as the state has 28.27% of the population fully vaccinated, according to Johns Hopkins coronavirus data.DeSantis also signed Senate Bill 2006, which was passed by lawmakers last week and goes into effect July 1. The law will force local government emergency orders to expire after seven days, and they can only be extended for up to 42 days. The law also allows the governor to invalidate any local emergency order.The governor said his Monday order was to enact some of the provisions of that new law faster.“I think that’s the evidence-based thing to do,” DeSantis said during a press conference in St. Petersburg on Monday. “I think folks that are saying they need to be policing people at this point, if you’re saying that, then you’re really saying you don’t believe in the vaccines.”Businesses can still mandate patrons wear masks and practice social distancing, and the order does not apply to schools, according to the Tampa Bay Times.St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman lashed out at DeSantis for the move.“Forgive me if I want to follow the experts and the opinions of experts like the CDC,” the Democrat said on ABC News’ podcast “Start Here” on Tuesday morning. “Not even quite 44% yet of the population of my county has been [at least partially] vaccinated. I was really hoping … to get at least above 50% vaccinations before we start looking at scaling back. But we’ve scaled back.”“Truthfully … 70%, we’re never going to see that,” he said citing the 70% vaccinated population threshold experts say needs to be reached for herd immunity. “I mean, I’d love to say we would … [but] I don’t think we’ll hit it. Because for whatever reason, it’s become politicized. Our health has become politicized. And that should have never, ever happened in this country.”The virus still poses a threat. On Monday, around 3,100 Floridians were hospitalized with COVID-19 as the primary diagnosis, per state data.St. Petersburg currently requires masks, and while indoors people must socially distance, but there is no limitation on restaurant capacity. Large-scale events are allowed outdoors with masks and other guidelines.Kriseman said DeSantis should be thanking cautious local officials for keeping cases down, especially as the state surpassed a devastating 2.24 million COVID-19 cases since the start of the pandemic and more than 35,000 resident deaths, according to state data.When asked if a governor or state legislature should have the right to invalidate a city’s COVID-19 restrictions, Kriseman said, “I don’t think that’s appropriate.”“I know what my community needs,” Kriseman said. “The governor doesn’t always know what each individual community needs because they’re not here. They don’t live here.”A string of other local officials have also denounced DeSantis’ lift of COVID-19 restrictions.Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava said, “I’m deeply concerned by this decision. We are still in a public health emergency, and our economy has not fully rebounded from crisis.”Florida Rep. Charlie Crist, the state’s former Democratic governor who announced Tuesday he will run for governor again, said DeSantis “failed to lead during the pandemic, leaving local officials as the last line of defense against the pandemic, forcing them to make the hard decisions to save lives,” the Tampa Bay Times reported.Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
We study the dynamics of dimethylsulphide (DMS) and dimethylsulphoniopropionate (DMSP) using the global ocean biogeochemistry model PlankTOM5, which includes three phytoplankton and two zooplankton functional types (PFTs). We present a fully prognostic DMS module describing intracellular particulate DMSP (DMSPp) production, concentrations of dissolved DMSP (DMSPd), and DMS production and consumption. The model produces DMS fields that compare reasonably well with the observed annual mean DMS fields, zonal mean DMS concentrations, and its seasonal cycle. Modeled ecosystem composition and modeled total chlorophyll influenced mean DMS concentrations and DMS seasonality at mid- and high latitudes, but did not control the seasonal cycle in the tropics. The introduction of a direct, irradiation-dependent DMS production term (exudation) in the model improved the match between modeled and observed DMS seasonality, but deteriorated simulated zonal mean concentrations. In PlankTOM5, exudation was found to be most important for DMS seasonality in the tropics, and a variable DMSP cell quota as a function of light and nutrient stress was more important than a PFT-specific minimal DMSPp cell quota. The results suggest that DMS seasonality in the low latitudes is mostly driven by light. The agreement between model and data for DMS, DMSPp, and DMSPd is reasonable at the Bermuda Atlantic Time Series Station, where the summer paradox is observed.
Home » News » Corruption activists say UK crime agency should investigate estate agency in Filat case previous nextRegulation & LawCorruption activists say UK crime agency should investigate estate agency in Filat caseCompany that took £390,000 advanced rent for London flat from son of jailed former Moldovan Prime Minister should be quizzed, says Global Witness.Nigel Lewis11th February 201902,207 Views Leading global anti-corruption organisation Global Witness has called on the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) to investigate an estate agency that took an advance rental payment of £390,000 from the son of disgraced former Moldovan Prime Minister Vladimir Filat.Last week it was revealed that his son 22-year-old Vlad Luca Filat, who has been studying in the UK since 2016, paid the huge sum as advance rent on his £7,000-a -week Knightsbridge flat on Cadogan Square (pictured) via an unnamed central London estate agency.It is this extravagant lifestyle, which included buying a £200,000 Bentley from a Mayfair dealership after he arrived in London, which brought him to the NCA’s attention.“The National Crime Agency should now be asking the bank, the university, the estate agent, and the car dealer what checks they made on this suspicious spender,” says Global Witness’s Senior Campaigner Ava Lee.Accounts frozenVlad Luca Filat has now been ordered to hand over £466,321 after a City of London judge was persuaded that his wealth had been generated by his father’s illegal activities, and granted the NCA forfeiture orders on his three UK bank accounts, which have been frozen since May.Changes to the UK’s legislation are due to be enacted that will require letting agencies that facilitate rent payments of more than £10,000 a month to be covered by anti-money laundering regulations.The call by Global Witness to investigate the estate agency involved with the Filat case coincides with ongoing attempts by HMRC to persuade more agents to file a greater number of suspicious activity reports about potential money laundering clients.For guidance on Anti Money Laundering regulations and compliance, click here.Global Witness National Crime Agency anti money laundering Vlad Luca Filat Vladimir Filat February 11, 2019Nigel LewisWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021 Hong Kong remains most expensive city to rent with London in 4th place30th April 2021
View post tag: Scorpene Indian Navy to receive second Scorpene submarine by year-end The Indian Navy launched the second Scorpene-class submarine during a ceremony held at Mazagon Dock Shipyard Limited on January 12.The launching ceremony of INS Khanderi was attended by India’s defense minister and navy and shipyard officials.According to the Indian Navy, the submarine is expected to be delivered by the year end.INS Kalvari, the lead ship in the class is currently undergoing trials and is likely to be commissioned into Navy by mid 2017.Khanderi has been christened after her predecessor, a former Foxtrot-class submarine decommissioned in 1989.India’s Mazagon Dock Shipyard Limited is currently building six Project 75 Scorpene submarines under a transfer of technology agreement with French shipbuilder DCNS.Scorpene submarines are also being built by Brazil while Poland and Norway are considering acquiring the submarines. Share this article View post tag: MDL View post tag: INS Khanderi Authorities January 12, 2017 Back to overview,Home naval-today Indian Navy to receive second Scorpene submarine by year-end View post tag: Indian Navy