Tag: 上海419 自荐

Five things: The Heineken Cup quarters

first_imgSchalk Brits and Steffon Armitage were the stand-out figures of the entire weekend. While they carried out bread-and-butter roles at set-piece and breakdown accurately, their pace and penetration with ball in hand was nothing short of freakish. Neither Ulster nor Leinster could live with them. It seems absurd that such a gifted pair of players possess a combined total of ten Test appearances. But there are logical reasons.Standing alone: Schalk BritsBrits’ competition for a Sprinbok berth at hooker over his career has comprised of John Smit, Bismarck du Plessis and Adriaan Strauss – a special trio. At 28, Armitage junior has time on his side. However, Stuart Lancaster has an understandable policy of selecting from the Aviva Premiership. Would Toulon’s pocket rocket give up the considerable financial and lifestyle benefits of the Top 14? Who knows?Their respective performances – not to mention that of Leicester’s precocious uncapped Welsh fly-half Owen Williams – demonstrated the autonomy of the Heineken Cup. For 80 minutes, international reputations are cast aside. The playing field is always level. It’s fascinating.Decisions, decisions                                                                  Show me a spectator who says they have never questioned a referee’s call. Then I’ll show you a liar. Passions run high in the Heineken Cup, and tempers often fray. As such, officials are subjected to heightened scrutiny and – inevitably – a bit more vitriol.Alain Rolland and Jerome Garces regularly divide opinion. This weekend was no different. Rolland ended Leicester’s challenge by awarding Clermont a dubious ruck penalty, while Garces boldly dismissed Payne to render Ulster’s task excruciatingly tough. By contrast, Wayne Barnes (Toulon v Leinster) and Nigel Owens (Munster v Toulouse) had relatively quiet outings. Not everybody was happy though. They never are.Rugby’s law book is a complex, ever-evolving organism that is eternally open to interpretation. That can be infuriating. But it’s never boring. When the stakes are high, it’s crucial to remember that referees are both human and trying their damndest to do a good job. It can be difficult, but respect for them is one of rugby’s cornerstones that should never be endangered. Besides, what would we all talk about if they always got things right?A short hop: Munster will be heading for MarseilleA familiar four TAGS: Highlight LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS Four enthralling matches over two days reinforced one thing robustly – the Heineken Cup (in its current form) is going out with a big old bang. Here’s a run-down of five lessons we learned from an absorbing set of quarter-finals.Home comfortsThe statistic doing the rounds last week was that exactly one in four quarter-finals in the Heineken Cup’s 19-season history had resulted in victory for the away side. That ratio remains intact, and the influence of the respective venues was a significant facet during each of these quarters.Munster rode a tsunamni of Thomond emotion to dispatch Toulouse. Clermont extended their amazing record at stronghold Stade Marcel Michelin. Toulon’s fanatic supporters were rewarded with a convincing triumph over Leinster. In each contest, ardent support and cacophonous noise made life tough for the visiting opponents.Though Ulster ended up on the wrong side of an extremely tight result against Saracens, Ravenhill was the most raucous of all. Jared Payne’s early red card gave home fans a cause to rally behind and their heroes responded, defying a numerical disadvantage to secure 57 per cent possession and 55 per cent territory over the Aviva Premiership leaders. It was a brave attempt, made possible by the tribal atmosphere.Two ways to bow outCan’t keep up: Toulon burst past LeinsterUlster’s overall display was no less courageous for the final result. In fact, Mark Anscombe should be unflinchingly proud of his charges and their collective commitment. They took Saracens to a dark place on Saturday night. Likewise, driven by Tom Youngs’ rallying cry at the break, Leicester scrapped for their lives. They made 95 tackles to Clermont’s 51 – and still ended up with a better success rate.The same cannot be said of the other two quarter-final losers. At times Toulouse looked as if they would rather be at the bar, while Leinster’s challenge subsided in a flurry of errors – 26 missed tackles and 13 turnovers all told. Frankly, there was a worrying dearth of ambition in attack too.After suffering an excruciating loss to his former employers, Tigers boss Richard Cockerill explained that he had asked his players to give everything. That way, they would regret nothing. Sadly, Toulouse and Leinster might look back on their exits in anger.Who needs caps?center_img Protecting their home: Clermont Auvergne won at home for the 75th game in a row And then there was a quartet. The same four that fought it out at the semi-final stage last season, albeit in a different combination. Once more Munster jump over The Channel, this time to face Toulon. Saracens defend Twickenham again too, dragging Clermont away from the Marcel Michelin, where they look invincible.The Top 14 heavyweights are favourites to reach another final, and possess unparalleled power up front. Nothing is guaranteed in this glorious competition, though. April 26 cannot come soon enough.last_img read more

Dissident Saudi journalist not seen since entering Istanbul consulate

first_img June 9, 2021 Find out more Follow the news on Middle East – North Africa Organisation WhatsApp blocks accounts of at least seven Gaza Strip journalists Saudi ArabiaTurkeyMiddle East – North Africa Europe – Central Asia Protecting journalists Saudi ArabiaTurkeyMiddle East – North Africa Europe – Central Asia Protecting journalists Missing journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s Turkish fiancee Hatice (L) and her friends wait in front of the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul, on October 3, 2018. (c) AFP June 8, 2021 Find out more News News News Help by sharing this information Reporters Without Borders (RSF) wants to know what has happened to Jamal Khashoggi, a well-We call on Saudi Arabia to end its violence against journalistsSign the petitionknown dissident Saudi journalist who has not been seen or heard from since entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul at 1 p.m. yesterday to request the papers he needs in order to marry a Turkish citizen. to go further One of his country’s best-known dissident journalists, Khashoggi fled to the United States in 2017, at the start of a crackdown on journalists, intellectuals and activists in Saudi Arabia that is still under way. More than 15 journalists and bloggers have been arrested since last summer, many of them unofficially. Iran: Press freedom violations recounted in real time January 2020 Saudi Arabia is ranked 169th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2018 World Press Freedom Index. Turkey is ranked 157th. October 3, 2018 – Updated on October 24, 2018 Dissident Saudi journalist not seen since entering Istanbul consulate Personnel at the Saudi consulate refused to comment when contacted by RSF today about Khashoggi, who nowadays is normally based in the United States and often writes opinion pieces for the Washington Post. Receive email alerts RSF joins Middle East and North Africa coalition to combat digital surveillance RSF_en News “Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance is extremely worrying,” said Sophie Anmuth, the head of RSF’s Middle East desk. “Until otherwise demonstrated, he is still inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and the Saudi authorities are responsible for his safety and well-being. We call on both the Saudi and Turkish authorities to shed all possible light on this matter and to do everything to ensure that this journalist reappears – free – as soon as possible. » June 3, 2021 Find out morelast_img read more

[Section 68 FERA] Liability For Offence Depends On Role One Plays In Company Affairs And Not On Mere Designation Or Status: SC [Read Judgment]

first_imgTop Stories[Section 68 FERA] Liability For Offence Depends On Role One Plays In Company Affairs And Not On Mere Designation Or Status: SC [Read Judgment] Ashok Kini27 July 2020 6:42 AMShare This – xThe Supreme Court has held that, for proceeding against a Director of a company for contravention of provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, the necessary ingredient for proceeding shall be that at the time offence was committed, the Director was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. The liability to be…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?LoginThe Supreme Court has held that, for proceeding against a Director of a company for contravention of provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, the necessary ingredient for proceeding shall be that at the time offence was committed, the Director was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. The liability to be proceeded with for offence under Section 68 of FERA, 1973 depends on the role one plays in the affairs of the company and not on mere designation or status, the bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy observed. In this case, Enforcement Directorate issued a show cause notice for alleged FERA violations against all the Directors of a company named Modi Xerox Ltd.(MXL) including Shailendra Swarup, who was a practicing Advocate of the Supreme Court. In response to this show cause notice, he stated that he was only a part-time, nonexecutive Director of MXL and he was never in the employment of the Company nor had an executive role in the functions of the Company. However, the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate after conducting a hearing, imposed a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- on all the Directors including Shailendra Swarup. This order was upheld by the Appellate Tribunal as well as the High Court. One of the main issues considered by the Apex Court was whether the Adjudicating Authority, Appellate Tribunal and the High Court erred in holding contravention of provisions of Section 8(3), 8(4) and Section 68 of FERA, 1973 by the appellant without their being any material that the appellant was responsible for the conduct of business of the Company at the time of commission of the offence and without recording any specific findings to that effect? The court observed that it was erroneous on the part of the adjudication authority to have not considered the material brought on the record that he was a part-time, non-executive Director not in charge of the affairs of the Company at the relevant time. It further noted that the adjudicating officer imposed the penalty without returning a finding that it was the appellant who was liable for contravention of the provisions of Section 8(3), 8(4) and Section 68 of the FERA, 1973. The court noted that Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 is a pari materia provision to Section 68 of the FERA, 1973. It referred to the dicutm in S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla (2005) 8 SCC 89, that the liability arises on account of conduct, act or omission on the part of a person and not merely on account of holding an office or a position in a company. The court observed: “Section 68 of FERA, 1973 deals with “Offences by companies”. Section 68(1) provides that “……………every person who, at the time of the contravention was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of business of the company as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention…………..” Section 68(1) creates a legal fiction, i.e., “shall be deemed to be guilty”. The legal fiction triggers on fulfilment of conditions as contained in the section. The words “every person who, at the time of the contravention was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of business” has to be given some meaning and purpose. The provision cannot be read to mean that whosoever was a Director of a company at the relevant time when contravention took place, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention. Had the legislature intended that all the Directors irrespective of their role and responsibilities shall be deemed to be 34 guilty of contravention, the section could have been worded in different manner. When a person is proceeded with for committing an offence and is to be punished, necessary ingredients of the offence as required by Section 68 should be present.” The court further observed that Section 68 of FERA, 1973 as well as Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act deals with the offences by the companies in the same manner. It added: “The ratio of the judgments of this Court on Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act as noted above are also clearly relevant while interpreting Section 68 of FERA Act. We, thus, hold that for proceeding against a Director of a company for contravention of provisions of FERA, 1973, the necessary ingredient for proceeding shall be that at the time offence was committed, the Director was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. The liability to be proceeded with for offence under Section 68 of FERA, 1973 depends on the role one plays in the affairs of the company and not on mere designation or status. ” A person, who is to be proceeded with has to be made aware of the necessary allegationsThe bench further observed that,even though, FERA, 1973 does not contemplate filing of a written complaint but in proceedings as contemplated by Section 51, the person, who has to be proceeded with has to be informed of the contravention for which penalty proceedings are initiated. “The expression “after giving that person a reasonable opportunity for making a representation in the matter” as occurring in Section 51 itself contemplate due communication of the allegations of contravention and unless allegations contains complete ingredients of offence within the meaning of Section 68, it cannot be said that a reasonable opportunity for making a representation in the matter has been given to the person, who is to be proceeded with..” “Learned ASG is right in his submission that FERA, 1973 does not contemplate any complaint but the Scheme of the Act indicate that a person, who is to be proceeded with has to be made aware of the necessary allegations, which may constitute an offence on his part. This Court in N. Rangachari (supra) has observed that a person in the commercial world having a transaction with company is entitled to presume that the Directors of the company are in charge of the affairs of the company. The presumption of a person in the commercial world is a rebuttable presumption and when adjudicating authority proceeds to impose a penalty for a contravention of FERA, 1973, essential ingredients constituting an offence under the FERA read with Section 68 has to be communicated to the person proceeded with to enable him to make effective representation in the matter.” Having held thus, the bench allowed the appeal and quashed the orders of Adjudicating officer, Appellate Authority as well as the High Court Case name: SHAILENDRA SWARUP  vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATECase no.:CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2463 OF 2014Coram: Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash ReddyCounsel: Sr. Adv C.A. Sundaram for the appellant and ASG K.M. Nataraj, for the respondent Click here to Read/Download JudgmentNext Storylast_img read more

Commissioners approve TIF projects, discuss business ventures

first_imgFARMINGTON – County commissioners discussed the funding of several projects with Tax Increment Financing funds at Monday’s meeting, including whether business entities should be able to take advantage of that funding.Commissioners approved four of five projects recommended by the TIF Committee, a group of Unorganized Territory residents that meets with County Clerk Julie Magoon and Greater Franklin Development Council’s Charlie Woodworth to score applications. The county maintains an account with funds captured from the TransCanada wind power project to support activities in the U.T., including economic development. After a committee scores a project application, the commissioners review it for final approval.Commissioners unanimously approved providing $7,900 to the High Peaks Creative Alliance to install 20-plus painted barn quilt plaques on barns and historical museums on the Maine High Peaks Arts and Heritage Loop. A total of $8,000 was approved for Kingfield Fire and Rescue to outfit a side-by-side utility task vehicle; another $20,000 to pay for the actual UTV will come from the Stephen and Tabitha King Foundation.Also approved was $50,000 for the Madrid Historical Society in conjunction with the Madrid Gateway project. That partnership effort would acquire land and buildings at the site of the former Madrid Store on the Sandy River. Existing buildings would be torn down and a scenic turnout would be installed with interpretive panels and a kiosk to provide information about the history of Madrid. In addition to the tourism benefit, the project would seek to provide unobstructed line of sight for those crossing the single-lane bridge over the Sandy. Magoon noted that the organizers would likely be meeting with the commissioners about partnering to request additional funds through the Maine Department of Transportation Municipal Partnership Initiative.Commissioners approved another $50,000 to support the Maine High Peaks Network, which is developing a regional branding effort that will include a centralized site linked to the various Chambers of Commerce and other entities.Commssioners did not approve a request for funds by the Freeman Ridge Bike Park, a private entity that requested $12,000 to further develop its trail system in Freeman Township. The committee had recommended the approval of $8,000. Commissioners balked at using TIF funds to support a private business, saying that such businesses should instead utilize the county’s revolving loan fund. Others at the meeting suggested that Kingfield was starting to look at supporting trail development for biking that could tie in with the Freeman Ridge park. The park currently charges $5 per day or $25 for a season’s pass. Woodworth noted that that money helped defray expenses but did not represent a moneymaker for the owner. Instead, Woodworth said, the park was a “passion project designed to benefit the community.”Commissioner Charlie Webster of Farmington suggested that businesses perhaps could take advantage of both the revolving loan fund and the TIF grant money, perhaps at a 50/50 rate. Woodworth and Magoon said they would speak to the owner of Freeman Ridge Bike Park. Meanwhile, Magoon will set up a meeting between the commissioners and Skowhegan Savings, the bank that manages the revolving loan fund, to talk about how that fund should be managed.The TIF Committee will continue to meet on additional projects that weren’t recommended to the commissioners yet.last_img read more