Minergy Limited (MIN.bw) listed on the Botswana Stock Exchange under the Mining sector has released it’s 2019 circular For more information about Minergy Limited (MIN.bw) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Minergy Limited (MIN.bw) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Minergy Limited (MIN.bw) 2019 circular Company ProfileMinergy Corporation Limited is a coal mining and trading company which supplies quality coal to industrial concerns and Independent Power Producers (IPPS) in Botswana. The Group structure consists of three entities: Minergy Limited, the listed company; Minergy Coal (Pty) Limited, the mining activities in Botswana; and MinSales (Pty) Limited, the South African-based marketing arm of Minergy Corporation Limited. The main activity of the Group centres around the Masama Project which operates in the Mmamabula Coalfield. The shallow opencast mine produces high quality coal within a competitive cost structure due to its size and location to the regional markets. The Masama Project produces large tonnages of coal that is suitable for export to Africa, India, Asia and China.
Rector Knoxville, TN TryTank Experimental Lab and York St. John University of England Launch Survey to Study the Impact of Covid-19 on the Episcopal Church TryTank Experimental Lab AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to PrintFriendlyPrintFriendlyShare to FacebookFacebookShare to TwitterTwitterShare to EmailEmailShare to MoreAddThis Inaugural Diocesan Feast Day Celebrating Juneteenth San Francisco, CA (and livestream) June 19 @ 2 p.m. PT Bishop Diocesan Springfield, IL Rector Hopkinsville, KY Featured Events Rector Belleville, IL The Church Investment Group Commends the Taskforce on the Theology of Money on its report, The Theology of Money and Investing as Doing Theology Church Investment Group Virtual Celebration of the Jerusalem Princess Basma Center Zoom Conversation June 19 @ 12 p.m. ET Rector Washington, DC The Church Pension Fund Invests $20 Million in Impact Investment Fund Designed to Preserve Workforce Housing Communities Nationwide Church Pension Group This Summer’s Anti-Racism Training Online Course (Diocese of New Jersey) June 18-July 16 Join the Episcopal Diocese of Texas in Celebrating the Pauli Murray Feast Online Worship Service June 27 Press Release Service Submit a Job Listing In-person Retreat: Thanksgiving Trinity Retreat Center (West Cornwall, CT) Nov. 24-28 Submit a Press Release Course Director Jerusalem, Israel Stephen Breyer, magistrado del Tribunal Supremo, habla sobre el papel de los tribunales de justicia durante un acto conmemorativo en honor de Thurgood Marshall. Foto de Keith Griffith.[Episcopal News Service] El magistrado del Tribunal Supremo Stephen Breyer resaltó la importancia de los tribunales de justicia y el papel de la ley en un acto en honor del difunto Thurgood Marshall. Breyer habló el 13 de mayo en la iglesia episcopal de San Felipe [St. Philip’s] ante un público de varios centenares de personas en ocasión del 10º. Aniversario de la conmemoración anual del Día de Thurgood Marshall, que honra al primer magistrado del Tribunal Supremo que en algún momento fue miembro de la junta parroquial de esta iglesia de Harlem.Marshall, el primer afroamericano en llegar al Tribunal Supremo, vivió en Nueva York mientras trabajaba de abogado para la Asociación Nacional para el Progreso de las Personas de Color ( NAACP, por su sigla en inglés) y se incorporó a San Felipe, una iglesia tradicionalmente negra, en 1938. La festividad del calendario episcopal que conmemora su vida y obra, el 17 de mayo, es el día en que él ganó su más famosa disputa en el Tribunal Supremo, Brown vs. la Junta de Educación.El programa comenzó a las 4:00 PM con un oficio de vísperas que incluía lecturas del profeta Amós y de I de Corintios. El Rdo. Patrick Williams, pastor interino de San Felipe, fue el celebrante, y el obispo de Nueva York Andrew M. L. Dietsche, impartió una bendición para dar inicio al programa de discursos.Breyer rindió un conmovedor tributo a Marshall, quien se jubiló del alto tribunal en 1991 y falleció a los 84 años en 1993.Sosteniendo una biografía de Marshall repleta de notas escritas a mano, Breyer abordó el legado de Brown vs. Junta de educación, el caso de 1954 en que el tribunal encontró que las leyes estatales que establecían escuelas separadas para estudiantes negros y blancos eran inconstitucionales.Marshall, argumentando el caso ante el tribunal “no reveló alguna parte de la ley que todos no conociéramos muy bien, está aquí en la Constitución”, dijo Breyer.“Ya crea usted en ese documento o no, ya crea en esa igualdad o no” , dijo él.“Desde luego, que ello ayudó a Estados Unidos a producir la integración, pero ayudó a Estados Unidos de otras formas también que son igualmente importantes”, expresó Breyer del dictamen del tribunal en el caso de Brown.Breyer prosiguió refiriéndose a una reciente visita que había recibido del presidente del Tribunal Supremo de Ghana, quien tenía curiosidad por saber acerca de la fuerza de la ley en la democracia estadounidense y le preguntó a Breyer: “¿Por qué la gente hace lo que ustedes dicen?”“Uno aspira al imperio de la ley en Ghana, uno no tiene que convencer a los jueces. A la gente que tenemos que convencer es a aquellos que no son jueces ni abogados”, dijo Breyer.Breyer agregó que el caso Brown vs. Junta de Educación de 1954 fue el dictamen “más importante” del Tribunal Supremo, pero que Cooper vs. Aaron, un caso que le siguió y que tenía que ver con la integración escolar, era su “preferido”. El dictamen del Tribunal en [el caso de] Cooper sostuvo que los estados tenían que obedecer los veredictos del Tribunal Supremo y desegregar las escuelas, incluso si no estaban de acuerdo.Breyer señaló que el dictamen Copper [vs. Aaron] lo firmaron los nueve magistrados [del Tribunal Supremo], lo cual, señaló él, era algo “inusual”.El consenso de que la judicatura debe respetarse, incluso cuando sus veredictos sean cuestionables o incluso erróneos, es vital para la sociedad, arguyó Breyer.Como un ejemplo, sacó a colación el dictamen de Bush vs. Gore del año 2000 que suspendió el recuento de la elección presidencial y le permitió a George W. Bush asumir la presidencia.“Yo disentí enérgicamente”, dijo Breyer refiriéndose a ese dictamen. “Pero la gente no se sublevó ni se mataron en las calles”.“Antes de llegar a esa conclusión, encienda la televisión y vea lo que sucede en los países que intentan arreglar las cosas de ese modo”, afirmó Breyer.Luego de la plática, los asistentes se reunieron en la cripta para una recepción.“Hoy fue un acontecimiento histórico, de manera que nos sentimos muy orgullosos”, dijo el feligrés Mark G. Barksdale, que trabaja para el municipio de Newark como director del Departamento de Desarrollo Económico y Vivienda. “Fue un gran honor para la iglesia y para la diócesis”.Barksdale, miembro de toda la vida de San Felipe, era un niño cuando Marshall estaba en la junta parroquial de la iglesia. Él recordaba con la copresidente del Comité Cultural de la iglesia, Beverly Brown, esos tiempos cuando Marshall coordinaba las celebraciones anuales del Día de San Felipe en ese mismo salón donde se encontraban ahora.“Estábamos corriendo aquí en la cripta con los otros niños, mientras los adultos hacían lo que nosotros hacemos ahora”, contó Brown, riéndose.El guardián mayor Charles Williams III dijo que era importante para la iglesia presentar oradores de fuera de la comunidad episcopal, tales como Breyer, que es judío.“Se supone que la Iglesia propague su palabra e incorpore lo de afuera”, dijo Williams. “Siempre hemos tenido la idea de invitar, y cito, a personas ‘no religiosas’ porque somos parte de la comunidad y la comunidad es parte de nosotros. Y uno nunca sabe, algunas personas pueden oír algo con lo cual se conectan”.San Felipe sí tiene una conexión con Breyer, ya que su hija, la Rda. Chloe Breyer es sacerdote asociada para la congregación.Williams señalaba que “no es frecuente que uno consiga [la participación de] un magistrado del Tribunal Supremo, especialmente en una iglesia”, haciendo notar que incluso Marshall participó menos de la vida de la iglesia después de ocupar su lugar en el Tribunal Supremo, para evitar cualquier posible sospecha de parcialidad.John W. Watkins, abogado de la Fiscalía del Distrito de Brooklyn, ayudó a planificar el evento, el cual atrajo a un buen grupo de estudiantes de derecho penal de John Jay College.“El mensaje que dio el magistrado fue realmente acertado”, dijo Watkins al término del acto. “En verdad me ayudó a reorientar mis sentimientos sobre el estado actual de cosas [pasando] de la cólera a la razón”.– Keith Griffith es un periodista independiente radicado en Nueva York. Es miembro de la iglesia episcopal de Santa María [St. Mary’s] en Harlem. Traducción de Vicente Echerri. Rector Martinsville, VA Submit an Event Listing Priest-in-Charge Lebanon, OH Featured Jobs & Calls Ya no son extranjeros: Un diálogo acerca de inmigración Una conversación de Zoom June 22 @ 7 p.m. ET Curate Diocese of Nebraska Episcopal Migration Ministries’ Virtual Prayer Vigil for World Refugee Day Facebook Live Prayer Vigil June 20 @ 7 p.m. ET Episcopal Charities of the Diocese of New York Hires Reverend Kevin W. VanHook, II as Executive Director Episcopal Charities of the Diocese of New York Director of Music Morristown, NJ Canon for Family Ministry Jackson, MS Assistant/Associate Priest Scottsdale, AZ Remember Holy Land Christians on Jerusalem Sunday, June 20 American Friends of the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem Rector Collierville, TN Rector and Chaplain Eugene, OR Associate Priest for Pastoral Care New York, NY Rector Smithfield, NC Rector Tampa, FL Associate Rector Columbus, GA Rector Albany, NY Rector (FT or PT) Indian River, MI Seminary of the Southwest announces appointment of two new full time faculty members Seminary of the Southwest Priest Associate or Director of Adult Ministries Greenville, SC Curate (Associate & Priest-in-Charge) Traverse City, MI Rector Bath, NC Family Ministry Coordinator Baton Rouge, LA Missioner for Disaster Resilience Sacramento, CA Rector/Priest in Charge (PT) Lisbon, ME Rector Shreveport, LA An Evening with Presiding Bishop Curry and Iconographer Kelly Latimore Episcopal Migration Ministries via Zoom June 23 @ 6 p.m. ET Por Keith GriffithPosted May 15, 2017 Assistant/Associate Rector Washington, DC Rector Pittsburgh, PA New Berrigan Book With Episcopal Roots Cascade Books Cathedral Dean Boise, ID Associate Rector for Family Ministries Anchorage, AK Director of Administration & Finance Atlanta, GA Youth Minister Lorton, VA Assistant/Associate Rector Morristown, NJ Magistrado del Tribunal Supremo rinde tributo a Thurgood Marshall durante acto conmemorativo en Harlem
Share on Facebook Tweet on Twitter Support conservation and fish with NEW Florida specialty license plate You have entered an incorrect email address! Please enter your email address here Please enter your name here By Allen BrownWe all want our homes to run smoothly, with as little maintenance as possible. Sadly, that’s not always the case, and sometimes it’s our plumbing that is causing the issue. It may be that the sink takes longer and longer to empty, or that there is a gurgling sound coming from the toilet. In the worst-case scenario, raw sewage may be sent back into the home instead of being drained away. We all want to rectify plumbing issues as quickly and cheaply as possible, but we don’t all have the expertise or experience to tackle it ourselves. In addition to that, some people don’t want to get their hands dirty. Let’s have a look right now at some of the ways people can tackle a blocked sewer line. Seek Professional HelpThere are situations where time is of the essence, or we don’t possess the necessary tools to do the job. If we are unable to locate the cause of the blockage, we may need to request professional assistance. A tradesman may decide to thread a video monitor down the sewer pipe to find the problem. According to the guys of https://allserviceplumbers.com/, industry certified professionals are frequently called to clean drains or deal with burst sewer pipes. People also use plumbers to perform a drain service which may include a camera inspection. The latter may reveal breaks or cracks within the sewer pipe, or other issues that will need attention. Ascertain the CauseWhen people do their cooking, it is a temptation to pour fat down the sink. This doesn’t all go down, however, but builds up inside the pipes. Trees are another culprit as their roots can penetrate loose joints or cracks in the pipes, and block the flow. Items of female hygiene are often disposed of down the toilet. This is unwise, as these can create issues over time. One cause is no one’s fault, and that’s when the plumbing is over fifty years old. The pipes simply reach the end of their lives, stop functioning correctly and need replacing. Use a Power WasherTurn off the water first. There may be a stopcock in the kitchen for this purpose. Go to the location of the sewer cleanout line. It will be either in the basement, garage or most probably outdoors. There should be a four inch pipe inside with a cap at the end. When this is unscrewed the pressure should be released, and water that is queuing indoors should now successfully drain. Because of the sewage, make sure you have rubber glasses and eye protection. Then connect the power washer gun to the sewer jetter. The nozzle needs to be a minimum of twelve inches down the pipe, but further is even better. Pull the trigger of the power washer and there should shortly be the wonderful sound of water flowing freely. This means that the issue has been successfully flushed away. Then turn off the gun and pull the hose out. Read up on the process before starting, however, and involve a plumber if there is any doubt. This is because it is possible to damage the sewer if it is done incorrectly. Tackle Grease with Baking Soda and VinegarStand by the sewer opening and pour an equal amount of vinegar and baking soda. There should be a chemical reaction created when these two are combined.The cleaning process will take at least sixty minutes. When this time has passed, flush the area with hot water. Use a Chemical CleanerThis is a very tempting route to take. What could be simpler than pouring a bottle of chemicals down the sewer? The problem is that the chemicals are designed to destroy everything in their path. The result could be pipe damage. Don’t get the chemicals anywhere near the skin or the eyes either, and wear protective gloves and goggles.The bottle will have clear instructions on the back as to how much to use and how long to leave it for. When this time is finished, make sure the drain is flushed thoroughly with hot water.For situations caused by fat and grease, caustic cleaner will be used. Copper sulfate is harnessed to tackle tree roots, and the process may need repeating several times. Oxidizing cleaner is the choice of many for more general blockages. It is important to be wise as to what is poured down the drains. If the bath or sink drains slowly, deal with it immediately rather than waiting until there is a total blockage. As we have seen, a layman can deal with some of the plumbing issues mentioned here, but if there is any doubt a professional should be called. Free webinar for job seekers on best interview answers, hosted by Goodwill June 11 LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply Please enter your comment! TAGSClogshomeMaintenancePlumblingSewer Linetips Previous article5 ways the COVID-19 pandemic could affect your college applicationNext articleFlorida Dept. of Health in Orange Co. celebrates World Heart Day; tips for living healthier Denise Connell RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR The Anatomy of Fear Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
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. Howard Lake | 22 January 2010 | News Telephone fundraising agency expands from Scotland Advertisement Tagged with: Consulting & Agencies England Recruitment / people Scotland Telephone fundraising agency Relationship Marketing is extending its reach from its Scottish and northern heartland to deliver services for charities and non-profits in London and the UK South. It has appointed Kathy Allen as Development Manager for the region.Allen joins Relationship Marketing from her role as Head of Group Marketing at London’s third sector marketing agency The Good Agency, and brings with her 10 years of charity client services experience.Based in London, she will work closely with Gordon Michie, Director of Development, who is based in Dunfermline, to ensure more effective dedicated service delivery to both new and existing clients in the south.The expansion is supported by three other new appointments: Carla Roberts joins as Client Services Manager, Alun Edwards as Campaigns Manager, and Paul Edge as Data and Systems Administrator.As a result, Relationship Marketing is able to offer full services with dedicated client service to charities in London and the South.The expansion of operations follows “37% growth in its client base over the last eighteen months”.Gordon Michie, Director of Development at Relationship Marketing, said: “We are in the enviable position of enjoying new business enquiries from charities all over the UK, which gives us both the need and the confidence to expand our offering with a dedicated team servicing London and the south.“Kathy Allen is perfectly placed to push this forward from a London office, she has an excellent understanding of relational fundraising and donor stewardship and her passion for working closely with charities at a strategic level will be invaluable to our clients, especially those that may want to explore telephone fundraising for the first time.” 59 total views, 1 views today 60 total views, 2 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis
Taxes paid to the federal government will go up this week, by a yearly total of about $6 billion, if Trump goes ahead and signs an order imposing tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. That comes to an average of about $78 per year for a family of four. It’s not a huge amount, but it adds up.If Trump had said, “I’m raising your taxes,” he might have been denounced even by many of those who supported him. But he didn’t say that. He said he was protecting jobs.Most of the media commentary on the president’s announcement concerned whether or not raising the prices of these imported commodities would encourage more production here. The consensus was that it won’t. Steel and aluminum plants have been shedding workers mainly because of changes in technology that eliminate jobs, not foreign competition.But imposing import tariffs of 25 percent on steel and 10 percent on aluminum will raise the prices of goods made from them. It is also likely to set off a global trade war as other countries impose tariffs on U.S. goods — and that could lead to an actual loss of jobs here.So why is Trump imposing this hidden tax on the people?Is he scraping the bottom of the barrel for government revenue so as to make a little dent in the huge budget deficit? It has really ballooned since the capitalist political establishment cut taxes on the rich while raising the military budget sky high.The national debt has now exceeded 20 TRILLION dollars. Paying just the interest on the debt is now the fourth-largest item in the federal budget. The financial institutions are laughing all the way to the bank, even as payments on this huge debt eat up any useful social programs.We can’t know exactly what Trump’s motives are (assuming that he knows himself) without getting into the mind of this scheming billionaire, and who wants to go there?FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
WW PHOTO: Sara FloundersFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this The following talk was given at the May Day Union Square rally in New York City on May 1, 2021. Clarissa, WAAR speaker.Hi! My name is Clarissa and I’m with the Workers Assembly Against Racism, WAAR.I want to thank our comrades in Bessemer, Alabama, who worked tirelessly to begin a union drive at their Amazon warehouse, a victory in itself. Although the vote was a “no,” this does not mean we have lost against [Jeff] Bezos and his empire – willing to spend $10,000 a DAY to union bust. It simply means what we already knew: that our capitalist oppressors will stop at nothing to try and snuff out the revolution. The capitalists and gatekeepers of our happiness and security are terrified. What these pigs don’t realize, however, is that their fear is like oxygen to our collective fire — it makes our power grow and we become stronger!I would next like to thank the Congress of Essential Workers who have picked up the torch, reignited it and just last week began a union drive at our very own Staten Island Amazon Warehouse, JFK 8! Right now only 22 percent of workers in New York City are unionized and organizing the Staten Island warehouse would pave the way for every warehouse in the city to unionize.Today is International Workers Day, born of the struggle for the eight-hour workday back in the late 1800s, and revitalized here in NYC in 2006 by migrant workers. You might be wondering, what exactly is a worker? Or “am I a worker?”If you’re asking these questions and you’re not a cop or landlord or a politician like Chuck Schumer, the answer is probably yes! Health home aides working exploitative 24-hour shifts are workers, cab drivers paying off $800,000 loans for their medallions are workers, adjunct faculty providing labor that keeps universities profitable are workers, Uber and Lyft drivers are workers, sex workers are workers, homeless and unemployed people are workers, incarcerated people subjugated under the prison-industrial complex are workers! We are workers and we have power! None of us are expendable, unlike what capitalism and white supremacy want us to think. We all deserve to have a good, safe, healthy life. And each and every one of us carries a spark that can burn this whole racist, sexist, exploitative, capitalist system down!
WhatsApp East Derry MLA hopeful of funding for Lough Foyle Ferry By News Highland – November 8, 2012 Facebook RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Minister McConalogue says he is working to improve fishing quota Twitter Twitter Calls are being made for a change in legislation from Stormont to enable more funding for the Magilligan – Greencastle ferry service.East Derry MLA John Dallat has lobbied for a funding package which would see the Lough Foyle service linking Greencastle and Magilligan operate all year round.The service currently only operates for part of the year.John Dallat has said he is now more hopeful than ever, that with a change in legislation, the service will now receive much needed funding….[podcast]http://www.highlandradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/jdall530.mp3[/podcast] 70% of Cllrs nationwide threatened, harassed and intimidated over past 3 years – Report Google+ Almost 10,000 appointments cancelled in Saolta Hospital Group this week Facebook News LUH system challenged by however, work to reduce risk to patients ongoing – Dr Hamilton WhatsApp Previous articleIslanders vote in referendum as Supreme Court rules against governmentNext articleThe Return of Sam News Highland Pinterest Need for issues with Mica redress scheme to be addressed raised in Seanad also Pinterest Google+ Dail hears questions over design, funding and operation of Mica redress scheme
Know the LawArbitration Court Reckoner: September 2020 Kanika Singh24 Oct 2020 1:55 AMShare This – xBy way of the present column, an attempt is made to briefly review the salutary judgments pronounced by the Courts in the month of September 2020 under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). That while as many judgments as possible are sought to be reviewed, owing to the limited column space, some judgments would invariably be left out. That…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?LoginBy way of the present column, an attempt is made to briefly review the salutary judgments pronounced by the Courts in the month of September 2020 under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). That while as many judgments as possible are sought to be reviewed, owing to the limited column space, some judgments would invariably be left out. That also while an attempt is made to include and review some judgments of various other High Courts, the emphasis is essentially on the judgments of the High Court of Delhi and Supreme Court of India. That judgments have been compiled for review with reference to the Section of the Act that they are primarily dealing with and a detailed analysis has been forgone in favour of succinctness. Section 7 (i) Non-signing of agreement containing arbitration clause by one party not a ground to hold that there was no binding arbitration clause In M/s. Chaitanya Construction Company v Delhi Jal Board High Court of Delhi took note of the fact that S. 7(4) of the Act itself provides that the arbitration agreement need not be in any concrete or particular form and held that the mere fact that the Respondent therein, who had invited tenders for the work in question, had not signed the agreement containing the arbitration clause was not a ground to hold that there was no arbitration clause. The Court took note of the fact that the petitioner signed the agreement containing the arbitration clause, as provided by the respondent, and that the respondent had issued the work orders based on this contract, and thus it cannot be said that the parties were not ad idem on the applicability of the arbitration clause, even though the Respondent had not eventually signed the agreement. Section 8 (ii) Averment in Written Statement that it is being filed “Without Prejudice to the Arbitration agreement” does not constitute an application u/s 8 Power of the Court to stay Arbitration must be impliedly read into the 1996 Act In Lindsay International P. Ltd. & Ors. v Laxmi Niwas Mittal & Ors. High Court of Calcutta took note of the fact that the Defendant before it had filed a comprehensive Written Statement of Defence taking objections and addressing on merits each of the claims in the plaint individually and specifically and it was not until the expiry of three full years that the said Defendant has moved for Request For Arbitration. It, thus held, that it could therefore safely be said that the Defendant has waived the Arbitration agreement and has submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court for all intents and purposes and the Arbitration agreement has been rendered inoperative by waiver. Further, held that an averment in the Written Statement of defense that it is being filed “Without Prejudice to the Arbitration agreement” does not constitute an application under S. 8 of the Act and a clear, specific and overt Act in the form of an independent, stand alone application is required to be made which the Defendant had not done. It held that while the Defendant has referred to the Arbitration agreement in his written statement but has not prayed or pleaded that it seeks reference of the disputes to arbitration. The Court further held that the power of the Court to stay arbitration must be impliedly read into the 1996 Act and to allow an arbitration to proceed even after the Defendant has waived the arbitration agreement, or that the same is null and void or inoperative would be a travesty of justice and thus accordingly restrained the Defendant from proceeding with the Request for Arbitration. Section 9 (iii) Copyright disputes pertain to rights in rem and thus not arbitrable In Sanjay Lalwani v Jyostar Enterprises & Ors. High Court of Madras held the S. 9 petition filed by the petitioner therein not maintainable as dispute were arising from Copyright Assignment, and thus pertained to right in rem and as such, were not arbitrable. (iv) In absence of manifest intention to arbitrate, Court would be reluctant to pass interim measures In H. Thiagaraj & Ors. v Maryammal & Ors., High Court of Madras set aside the injunction granted by the District Judge in a S. 9 petition inter alia on the ground that though the dispute was raised by the applicant in the year 2009 and the Court had directed the parties to go for arbitration as early as 02.03.2011, no steps whatsoever was taken out by the applicant or some other party to refer the matter to arbitration. Only in the year 2014, the application u/s 9 of the Act has been filed. It held that the above conduct of parties makes it clear that manifest intention to arbitrate the dispute is absent on the part of the applicants, who were the parties to the earlier proceedings. Therefore, it held, that in view of absence of manifest intention shown by the petitioners, who seek interim measure u/s 9 of the Act, the Court normally would be reluctant to pass interim measures and set aside the order of the District Court. (v)Interim measure/Relief in the nature of restraining person from carrying on trade or business cannot be granted In Shraddha Entertainment v Kondaduvam Entertainment & Ors. High Court of Madras was seized of a matter where the petitioner/appellant therein had filed both appeals against the order of the arbitrator refusing to grant certain injunctions as also filed petitions u/s 9 seeking similar reliefs before Court. The Court firstly held that when the arbitrator has already rejected such a relief, which was challenged before the Court in the appeal, again seeking similar prayer by way of interlocutory applications cannot be maintainable. The Court further took note of the fact that Petitioner had sought 2 injunctions – One is injunction restraining the Respondent from opening or operating any bank account either in their individual or joint names and/or in the names of any entity in which any or all of them are in control and the other is to direct Respondents to disclose the names and details of all banks where they hold any account whatsoever operated by them either individually or jointly. The Court held that first relief sought by the appellant is in the nature of restraining the person from carrying on trade and business and such relief cannot be granted in the name of interim measure. Qua the second relief, Court held that the arbitrator had rightly negativated the same as to give any such relief the provision under Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC had to be satisfied which had not been done. (vi) Execution of orders passed in S. 9 In Cupino Ltd. v Shree Ahuja Properties & Realtors P. Ltd. & Ors., High Court of Bombay rejected the contention of the Respondent therein that the order passed u/s 9 is not a final order/decree and there is no occasion to execute the order under Order XXI, CPC. The Court held Section 36 of the Code makes available all remedies for execution of decrees to be employed for execution of Orders as well. Further, held, the once an order under Section 9 has become final order of payment of that amount into court, even though arbitration is pending, Order XXI can certainly be resorted to for executing the said Order of the Court. (vii) Mere claim, which is yet to be adjudicated, does not constitute special equities to entitle injunction against invocation of bank guarantee In CRSC Research And Design Institute Group Co. Ltd v. Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation Of India Limited & Ors. High Court of Delhi reiterated the criteria, which are required to be satisfied, before interim protection can be granted u/s 9 namely (a) the existence of an arbitration clause, and manifest intent, of the S. 9 petitioner, to invoke the said clause, and initiate arbitral proceedings, (b) the existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss, justifying such grant of interim relief to the applicant, and (c) the existence of emergent necessity. The Court rejected the argument of special equities premised on the ground, that the claim of the Petitioner therein against Respondent, is far in excess of the amounts of the bank guarantees and invocation must be stayed. The Court held that a mere claim, of the petitioner, against the respondent – the sustainability of which is yet to be adjudicated – cannot constitute “special equities”, so as to justify injuncting the invocation of unconditional bank guarantees, even if such a claim is in excess of the amount covered by the bank guarantees. Further held that in case of an irrevocable and unconditional bank guarantee the condition, in the agreement between the parties, under which the bank guarantees could be enforced, cannot be cited as a ground to stay the invocation and encashment thereof. Section 11 (viii) How to harmonise or reconcile two different arbitration clauses in two related agreements between the same parties and same transaction In Balasore Alloys Ltd. v Medima LLC , Supreme Court of India held in order to harmonise or reconcile two different arbitration clauses in two related agreements between the same parties and to arrive at a conclusion as to which of the clauses would be relevant in the given facts; it would be necessary to refer to the manner in which the arbitration Clause was invoked and the nature of the dispute that was sought by the parties to be resolved through arbitration. On such consideration, in the facts of the case, the Court held that the nature of dispute raised by the parties indicate that those aspects are to be determined in terms of the provisions contained in the Main Agreement and thus disputes would have to be decided as per arbitration clause in the Main agreement and the same would be the relevant arbitration clause and not the arbitration clauses contained in various purchase orders. (ix) S. 5 of Limitation Act does not apply to application u/s. 11 of the Act In The Board of Trustees of the Port of Chennai v. X-press Container Line (UK) Ltd. & Ors., High Court of Madras held that Section 5 of Limitation Act cannot be applied to condone the delay in a suit and extend the period of limitation and this logic will apply to an application filed u/s 11 of the Act also. Section 14 (x)Once Managing Director of the Respondent is ineligible to appoint arbitrator, Company can also not appoint In M/s. Omcon Infrastructure P. Ltd. v Indiabulls Investment Advisors Ltd., High Court of Delhi allowed the petition for termination of mandate of the arbitrator appointed unilaterally by the Respondent in view of the ratio of the judgment in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v HSCC India Ltd. While doing so, it rejected the narrow construction sought to be given by the arbitrator to the judgment of Perkins (supra) on the purported ground that judgement in Perkins (supra) was not applicable as the authority to nominate the arbitrator was vested in a Company (that being the word used in the arbitration clause) and not an individual. The Court held that once the Managing Director of the Respondent is ineligible to appoint arbitrator in view of Perkins (supra), the same would also bar the Company itself from unilaterally appointing the arbitrator. (xi) Voluntary recusal of Arbitrator in one arbitral proceeding not a ground for terminating mandate of Arbitrator in a separate arbitral proceedings between same parties In Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. v Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd., High Court of Delhi held that that the voluntary recusal of the Presiding Arbitrator in another arbitration proceeding is not a ground for terminating the mandate of a Presiding Arbitrator in a separate arbitration proceedings, though between the same parties. It further held that Presiding Arbitrator’s brother (mentions Petitioner’s brother in para 16 of judgment but the context reveals that the reference is to the Presiding Arbitrator’s brother) who appeared as a Senior Advocate on behalf of the respondent before the Himachal Pradesh High Court in a separate unconnected matter is not “close family member” as defined in Category 10 of the Seventh Schedule and therefore, the Presiding Officer is not ineligible to act as an Presiding Officer under Section 12 (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Section 17 (xii) Principles governing grant of injunctions, appointments of receiver etc are a part of substantive law of country within ambit of S. 28(1)(a) In Flywheel Logistics Solutions P. Ltd. v Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd. & Ors., High Court of Madras was dealing with challenge to orders passed by the arbitrator u/s 17 of the Act to seize the vehicles which had been purchased by way of loan agreement which was subject of arbitration. The Court held that though S. 19 of the Act states that the Arbitral Tribunal is not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, this is primarily targeted at unshackling the Arbitral Tribunal from the procedural wrangles of the Code. Further held that, on the other hand, principles governing the grant of injunctions, appointments of receiver etc are a part of the substantive law of the country and by virtue of S. 28(1)(a) of the Act the Tribunal shall be bound to decide in accordance with the substantive law for the time being in force in India. While the finance company or Bank may have a contractual right to repossess the asset upon commission of default by the borrower, it cannot be gainsaid that in many cases mechanical seizure of vehicles, en masse, may lead to substantial injustice. It held that in a number of cases the borrowers generate income by putting these vehicles to use and therefore, it may be worthwhile for the Tribunal to balance equities, in appropriate cases, by allowing the vehicles to operate while at the same time direct that some portion of the income got from plying these vehicles be deposited to the credit of the finance company. Further held, that the Tribunals are under no obligation to pass orders seizing vehicles mechanically and in a vast majority of these cases, a common sense approach would not only ensure that the finance company is able to realise some portion of the outstanding dues periodically while at the same time enabling the borrower to retain the vehicle to generate income. Section 34 (xiii) Multi-tier arbitration In C.S. Sivanandan v Karvy Stock Broking Ltd. & Ors.¸High Court of Madras held that arbitration in the case at hand was governed by ‘National Stock Exchange bye-laws’ and Bye – law 19 provided for a multi-tier arbitration. The Court took note of the fact that the petition had been filed u/s 34 of Act assailing the award made by the Arbitral Tribunal, which is the second tier of the three-tiered/multi tiered arbitration mechanism provided for under Chapter XI of NSE Byelaws. It held that, therefore, the third tier of arbitration mechanism has not been exhausted. In this scenario, the Court was of the considered view that it would be appropriate to relegate the parties to Appellate Arbitral Tribunal under Chapter XI (19) of NSE by-laws leaving open all questions, rights and contentions of the parties and preserving the right of petitioner to seek exclusion of time spent in the petition before Court. (xiv) View of the Arbitrator plausible view and merits no interference In NHAI v Sahakar Global Ltd.¸ High Court of Delhi while dismissing the petition filed assailing the arbitral award held that not only was the scope of judicial interference in an arbitral award limited if the view taken by the Arbitrator is a possible view but also further held that the arbitrator has, after detailed analysis of the documents and pleadings, rightly come to the conclusion that implementation of GST by the Government of India constitutes change of law having material adverse affect on the obligations of parties and is thus a force majeure event as per the clause between the parties. (xv) Statutorily imperative to examine limitation even if not set up as a defence In P. Kothai & Ors. v. Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. & Ors. High Court of Madras held that that the trigger notice invoking arbitration was clearly barred by limitation and therefore, the impugned award therein is vitiated for entertaining arbitral proceedings which are barred by limitation and not examining limitation though S. 3 of Limitation Act read with S. 43 of the Act makes it statutorily imperative to do so even if it is not set up as a defence. The Court reiterated that in case of loan, that the date of commission of default would be the cause of action for purposes of limitation. Section 36 (xvi) Subsequent application filed not hit by res judicate if execution petition had been disposed off with liberty In Kal Airways P. Ltd. v M/s. Spicejet Ltd. & Anr High Court of Delhi held that when an enforcement petition had been disposed off with the liberty to the Decree Holder to approach the Court in the event of any subsequent development with respect to the ‘status of the judgment debtor’, then filing of an application on the ground of material change in the financial health of the Judgment debtor would not be hit by res judicata or constructive res judicate and the change in status need not be only limited to insolvency or bankruptcy proceedings but would include other events that would show material changes in the financial health of the Judgment Debtor including auditor’s reports. The Court further held that contentions with regards to award being erroneously premised or the prospects of Judgment Debtor succeeding in their challenge under S. 34 of the Act would have no bearing in an execution petition once the award is not stayed and the award would have to be seen on the face of it. Section 37 (xvii) Qualitative difference between the two challenges provided u/s 37(1) & 37(2) & even between S. 37(2)(a) & 37(2)(b) In Dinesh Gupta & Ors. v Anand Gupta & Ors. High Court of Delhi held that principle that parties have by express choice excluded court’s jurisdiction by opting for arbitration would apply, with equal force, to challenges to interlocutory orders of arbitral tribunals, u/s 37, as they would, to challenges to the final award, u/s 34. The Court held that there is, necessarily, a qualitative difference between the two challenges provided u/s 37(1) & 37(2), though both would lie to the High Court. The challenge u/s 37(1), which is directed against a final award of the arbitrator/arbitral tribunal, is akin to a second appeal. The challenge u/s 37(2), on the other hand, is directed against the decision of the arbitral tribunal and therefore must necessarily to conform to the discipline enforced by S. 5. The Court held it would, therefore, be improper for a Court to treat an appeal, u/s 37 (2) of the 1996 Act, as akin to an appeal under the CPC. An appeal against an order by an arbitrator, or by an arbitral tribunal, is an appeal sui generis, and interference, by the Court, in such appeals, has to be necessarily cautious and circumspect. The Court further held that this position would stand especially underscored where the order, under challenge, is discretionary in nature and in such case, merits interference, under Section 37(2)(b), therefore, only where such exercise is palpably arbitrary or unconscionable. If anything, therefore, the jurisdiction of the Court, under Section 37(2)(b), is even more limited than the jurisdiction that it exercises under Section 37(2)(a) or, for that matter, under Section 34. Further held, that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 17(1)(ii)(b), the arbitrator is not strictly bound by the confines of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the CPC, but is also proscribed from acting in a manner completely opposed thereto. (xviii) Doctrine of Proportionality as part of special equities can only be applied if there is crystallized liability In Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. v National Hydro Electric Power Corporation Ltd. Division Bench of High Court of Delhi upheld the refusal of the Single Judge to grant injunction against encashment of bank guarantees and held that mere extension of the completion time can by no stretch be reckoned as satisfaction, to prevent invocation of performance BGs either because the contractor had failed to faithfully perform its obligations or it failed to commence work, or had suspended the work or had failed to take effective steps for making good the defects etc. It further held that while proportionality could be included in the exception of special equities, it can be applied only where the crystallized liability is significantly lower than the value of the Bank Guarantee furnished and the contract is a concluded one and held that the same did not apply in the present case, where neither condition prevails and the contract is neither a concluded one nor has it been terminated and thus the liabilities are not crystallized. (xix) Court exercising jurisdiction u/s 37 must be extremely circumspect In Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v Aksh Optifibre Ltd. High Court of Delhi reiterated that when the arbitral award has been upheld u/s 34 of the Act, the appellate court cannot, in exercise of jurisdiction u/s 37 of the Act, proceed to independently assess the relative merits and demerits of the case and while exercising jurisdiction u/s 37 of the Act, the court must be extremely circumspect in interfering. The Court further noted that the appellant, therein, had, in fact, agreed that the Arbitral Tribunal can fix the rate for the intercity bandwidth charges, payable by the respondent. After agreeing to such a position, it was now not open to the appellant to state that the view taken by the learned Sole Arbitrator was wrong since the rates were fixed and agreed. Section 45 (xx)Period of limitation for filing an enforcement/execution petition for a foreign award In Government of India v Vedanta Limited and Others, Supreme Court of India held that the period of limitation for enforcement of a foreign award in India would be governed by Indian law. It held that Foreign awards are not decree of Indian Courts and upon grant of recognition and enforcement u/s 48 of the Act, for the limited purpose of enforcement the foreign award is deemed to be a decree of the Court that granted such enforcement. Accordingly, the Court held that the period of limitation for enforcement of foreign award would be governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Further held that the bar contained in Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not extent to a substantive application under the Act, consequently, delay may be condoned on an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It also held that the Courts at the seat of the arbitration have “supervisory” or “primary” jurisdiction while the Courts at the place of enforcement have “enforcement” or “secondary” jurisdiction. That as seat of the arbitration was in Malaysia, thereby the curial law was Malaysian law and the curial law would determine the procedure of arbitration including challenge to an award. Therefore, the Malaysian Courts were right in applying Malaysian law for testing the Award on a challenge by the Petitioner. However, the Court further held that merely because the Malaysian Courts have upheld the Award, that would not be an impediment on the Indian enforcement Court to examine the Award for enforcement in light of S. 48 of the Arbitration Act. If the Award is found to be against public policy of India, it would not be enforced by Indian Courts. However, on consideration, Court held that the award is not against public policy of India. Article 227 (xxi)As no restriction either in the arbitration agreement or in the order of reference, counter claims can be raised In Ved Prakash Mithal & Sons v Principal, Kirori Mal College & Ors, High Court of Delhi was dealing with a petition impugning the order of the Arbitrator rejecting the Petitioner’s application for rejection of counter claims on the ground that there was no specific reference of counter claim by the Court while referring the parties to arbitration u/s 8 of the Act and thus arbitral tribunal is precluded from entertaining the counter claim. The Court held that there is no restriction either in the arbitration agreement or in the order of reference with regard to disputes that can be referred or exclusion from reference of certain disputes and thus contention of Petitioner that that the counterclaims could not have been entertained by the Arbitral Tribunal is not sustainable.(Kanika Singh is a Delhi-based lawyer, and may be reached at [email protected]) Also by the same author :Arbitration : Court Reckoners [August 2020] Arbitration : Court Reckoner [May 2020]Arbitration: Court Reckoner [June 2020] Arbitration : Court Reckoner [July 2020]  Arb. P. 795/2019 decided on 01st September 2020  GA 820/2020 decided on 15th September 2020  O.A. 1194/2018 decided on 3rd September 2020  C.M.A Nos.2579, 14027 of 2019 decided on 4th September 2020  C.M.P. No. 8322 and 8323 of 2020 decided On 04th September 2020  Interim Application No. 1 of 2020 in Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 528 of 2020 decided on 14th September 2020  OMP(I)(COMM) 184/2020 decided on 30th September 2020  Arb P. (Civil) No. 15/2020 decided on 16th September 2020 O.P. No. 511/2009 decided on 17th September 2020  OMP(T)(COMM)35/2020 decided on 01st September 2020  2019SCCOnlineSC1517  OMP(T)(COMM) 65/2019 decided on 25th September 2020  C.M.P. Nos. 271, 273, 275, 277, 289, 617 to 621 and 623 to 640 of 2020 decided On: 17.09.2020  O.P. No. 594/2009 decided on 21st September 2020  OMP(COMM) 486/2020 decided on 29th September 2020  O.P. No. 758/2018 decided on 29th September 2020  OMP(ENF.)(COMM)31/2019 order dated 02nd September 2020  Arb A. 4/2020 decided on 17th September 2020  FAO(OS) (COMM) 106/2020 decided on 22nd September 2020  FA0(OS)(COMM) 103/2020 decided on 23rd September 2020  CM(M) 452/2020 decided on 24th September 2020 Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story
Related posts:No related photos. More than half the UK workforce believes it suffers above-average stress atwork. A study by the British Market Research Bureau also reveals that public sectorworkers are even more stressed – with 60 per cent claiming they feel”above average stress and pressure”. The survey of 1,526 workers shows almost half the workforce (47 per cent)feel their job forces them to make sacrifices in the area of work and personalbalance and 40 per cent feel they devote too much time to work. However, it shows that pressured staff will stay with their employer. Thereport finds that 53 per cent of workers who feel their work-life balance iswrong still expect to be with their employer in two years’ time, compared with55 per cent of those who feel their balance is right. Many who feel stressed still feel proud of their workplace – 70 per cent ofthose who believe their work-life balance is wrong are proud of their employer,compared to 73 per cent of those happy with their balance. Health and Safety Commission chairman Bill Callaghan said the UK urgentlyneeds to tackle stress, and that there is a business case for doing so. “Iam amazed at the complacent attitude to work-related stress in somequarters,” he said. “Too often I hear phases like ‘a little stressdoesn’t do any harm’.” Callaghan said HSE research shows that work-related stress costs UKemployers £400m a year. “In human terms, depression, anxiety or a physical condition ascribedto work related stress – on average – results in half a million people per yearreporting stress at levels making them ill.” By Quentin ReadeHow the HSE intends to help tackle stress:– Launch a new training and resourcewebsite: www.hse.gov.uk/resources– Encourage best practice and benchmarking (at www.ohstrategy.net)– Build a business case for action– Develop management standards for measuring the effectivenessof dealing with occupational stress Previous Article Next Article Stress affects more than half of the UK workforceOn 22 Oct 2002 in Personnel Today Comments are closed.