How many types of courts are there in Pakistan?

A  petitioner challenges a certain law in the courts, saying the law causes unfair discrimination, so the question a judge would ask is: is the law necessary, or does it reflect a government preference? That is the third question.

The significance of the question is very high, as it helps the judge determine whether the law serves a legitimate government interest or not. To protect the constitution, the questions and answers are discussed in the courtroom.

Hence, a petitioner challenges a certain law in the courts, saying the law causes unfair discrimination, so the question a judge would ask is: is the law necessary, or does it reflect a government preference? That is the third question.

Learn more about the question for judges here.

https://brainly.com/question/28044605

#SPJ1

Answer:

"crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation."

Explanation:

As a member of Congress, the process of turning my proposed legislation into a law would involve several steps.

The first step would be to draft the bill and obtain co-sponsors who would support and help promote the bill. Once the bill is drafted, it would be introduced in either the House of Representatives or the Senate, depending on the subject matter of the bill.
After being introduced, the bill would be referred to a relevant committee for review and consideration. The committee would hold hearings, gather information, and potentially make changes to the bill before deciding whether to recommend it for further consideration by the full chamber.
If the committee recommends the bill, it would then be debated and voted on by the full chamber. If the bill passes the House or Senate, it would then go to the other chamber for consideration and a vote.
If both chambers pass the bill, it would then go to a conference committee to reconcile any differences between the versions passed by the House and Senate. Once a compromise bill is reached, it would go back to both chambers for a final vote.
Assuming the bill is passed by both the House and Senate, it would then be sent to the President for signature or veto. If the President signs the bill, it becomes law. If the President vetoes the bill, Congress can override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers.
Overall, the process of turning a proposed bill into law is complex and requires significant effort, negotiation, and compromise. However, with persistence and collaboration, it is possible to create meaningful legislation that can benefit the American people.

Learn more about law :

https://brainly.com/question/29553358

#SPJ11

Answer:

B

Explanation:

Answer:

Breach of contract rights

Explanation:

The rights that Calibrato instruments can exercise is embeded on the agreement between a contractor and the buyer which is known as Tender of delivery .

Tender of delivery is the obligation owed by a seller/contractor to a buyer to deliver or transfer goods purchased to the buyer.

Hence Calibrato instruments can sue Stronghold Metals for Breach of contract rights.

It was a result of the transition from rural to industrial economies and the demand for inexpensive labour to support the expansion of industry.

The exploitation of colonised peoples, the expansion of European imperialism, and the establishment of capitalist economies were some of the reasons of this system. Industrial servitude has far-reaching and disastrous effects. Long hours, low pay, and dangerous working conditions were standard in these institutions, which resulted in widespread destitution. Millions of individuals were exploited and driven into slavery as a result of the system, many of whom were made to labour in appalling conditions.The system of industrial servitude had larger economic and social repercussions in addition to its immediate effects on employees. It was a factor in the growing wealth disparity between the rich and the poor.

learn more about slavery here:

brainly.com/question/9331183

#SPJ4

Answer:

Res judicata

Explanation:

Res judicata is a Latin word which means matter decided. It is a situation in which an apex court has ruled over a case and there is no more room for any appeal or retrial of any form.

The judgement is usually final with both parties having no option than to accept it.

Res judicata is also known as the doctrine that forever bars the parties in a lawsuit to bring action again for the same claim.

Answer:

Nonviolent direct action may include sit-ins, strikes, street blockades, sabotage, and counter-economics. Violent direct action may include political violence, assault, arson and property destruction.

Explanation:

Answer:

Martin Luther King Jr.'s decision to utilize nonviolence was based on religious principles. In fact, King discovered the use of nonviolent action as a political tool through learning about Gandhi's success in India.

King's approach was specifically Christian in orientation, drawing on his own status as a minister and the centrality of the Church in the lives of the Montgomery, Alabama, African-Americans who were the first protestors he led. His speeches utilized the inspirational crescendo structure of African-American sermonizing and he typically used biblical themes in them. This provided a deeper source of unity than the specific issue at hand and his able lieutenants were drawn from the rolls of black preachers.

King's methods were  "step-wise." The King Center lists six:

Step One. Information gathering

Step Two. Education

Step Three. Personal commitment

Step Four. Negotiations

Step Five. Direct action

Step Six. Reconciliation

Creating opportunities for resolution without confrontation and ensuring that both proponents and adversaries have sufficiently accurate information to make decisions both about the issue and the process.

Hope it helps

Please mark me as the brainliest

Thank you

Answer:

Dynamic Economy

Explanation:

Answer:

1. It made a Unilateral mistake

2. It cannot be voided by the cruise line

Explanation:

This cruise line has made a Unilateral mistake in this scenario.

In terms of the law, this cruise line does not have the power to void the transaction on its own accord in the normal course of business. but it has the right to plea in a law court that it did this business transaction sale based on non availability of complete price quote and also that there was a unilateral mistake of facts. It will also have to make a case that the sale was caused by the buyer who tried to benefit from the mistake through misrepresentation and omissions.

The court would then decide on the case at it own discretion.

Answer:

cameron plays the role of an eye witness

Explanation:

Cameron was called upon during the criminal trial because of the fact that he was present at the scene of the crime which makes him an eye witness to the crime. In law, a witness is someone who has first hand informatuon of an incident who is called to testify to this information or knowledge he has during a court proceeding or trial. What cameron says in court is known as a testimony.

Answer:

The rights and welfare of participants must be safeguarded by researchers, who must also adhere to all local, state, and federal laws that may be in force. Researchers are expected to adhere to ethical standards and principles that are appropriate for their field and research. In order to conduct and design clinical trials, investigators are expected to adhere to Good Clinical Practice (GCP) standards.

Explanation:

Answer:

The team's primary responsibility is to gather facts, data, and any evidence while establishing the sequence of events that led up to the event that prompted the investigation. They also analyze the data and draw conclusions based on their findings.

1. False. Rupert's Land was originally purchased for £300,000.

2. False. A federal system of government divides powers between the federal government and regional governments.

3. False. The BNA Act (also now known as the Constitution Act, 1867) was not the first statute passed by the Canadian government.

4. False. The new nation of Canada was a federal system and not a legislative union like Britain.

5. True. The federal government in Canada is responsible for maintaining peace, order, and good government.

Multiple choice questions:

1. The original members of Confederation were Canada West, Canada East, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. Option B is the correct answer.

2.Confederation promised economic advantages, transportation advantages, defence advantages and trade advantages. Option C is the answer.

3. The Canadian Constitution, embodied in the BNA Act, borrowed from Britain the political party system and the principle of responsible government. Option D is the answer.

4. A major departure of Canada from the British system of government was its structure as a federation. Option D is the correct answer.

5. The powers of municipal, or local, governments are based in a the Constitution provincial powers to form and maintain local governments. Option B is the answer.

To learn more about Federalism:

https://brainly.com/question/30154201

#SPJ4

Answer:

am not sure but I can say you all the best....

The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) is a law passed by the U.S. Congress in 1974. It was enacted to protect homebuyers and sellers from being overcharged or cheated on settlement costs by real estate brokers, lenders, and closing agents.

Here are some statements that refer to RESPA regulations:RESPA requires that mortgage lenders give borrowers an estimate of the settlement costs three days after the application. The estimate provided must be a good-faith estimate and must be detailed enough to give the borrower a clear idea of the costs they should expect. Borrowers have the right to choose their own settlement agent or attorney, and RESPA mandates that the lender cannot mandate that a particular agent or attorney be used. In some cases, mortgage lenders require borrowers to establish an escrow account to cover property taxes and insurance premiums. These funds are held by the lender and paid out to the appropriate parties when necessary. Mortgage lenders are required by RESPA to provide borrowers with an annual statement outlining the funds held in escrow and their use. Borrowers have the right to receive detailed settlement documents at least one day before closing, giving them time to review and ask any questions. The only statement that does not refer to RESPA regulations is:RESPA requires that lenders disclose the loan's interest rate.

To know more about Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act visit:

https://brainly.com/question/26066905

#SPJ11

Answer:

The three basic types of identification procedures are: Lineup, show-up, and photographic array. When is an accused entitled to counsel at an identification procedure. An accused in entitled to counsel at a post-indictment lineup that is conducted for identification purposes - a critical stage of a criminal proceeding.

Answer:

definitaly thought process but serching process to

Explanation:

Parking and passing require coordination of many different driving skills combined with a continuous searching process.

While driving a vehicle on the road, it is important to be alert and be cautious. There are certain traffic rules to be followed while driving.

Parking one's car and passing over another car requires skills and rules to follow.

One requires coordination of driving skills along with continuous searching process for parking and passing a vehicle.

There are several types of parking maneuvers :

Passing a vehicle requires a good judgement.

Learn more about "driving" here :

https://brainly.com/question/21945861

The probability of selecting 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans from the city council is approximately 0.476 or 47.6%.

Let's assume that the city council has 10 members, with 6 Democrats and 4 Republicans.

We can use the idea of combinations to calculate the likelihood of choosing Democrats and Republicans. The binomial coefficient formula can be used to determine how many different ways there are to choose a specific number of Democrats and Republicans.

Probability of selecting 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans:

P(3 Democrats and 2 Republicans) = C(6, 3) × C(4, 2) / C(10, 5)

C(n, k) = the number of combinations of n items taken k at a time.

P(3 Democrats and 2 Republicans) = (6 choose 3) * (4 choose 2) / (10 choose 5)

= (20) × (6) / (252)

= 120 / 252

= 0.476

Learn more about Democrats at:

brainly.com/question/14213873

#SPJ4

A legal system can either promote or suppress unionization through various laws, regulations, and policies that are implemented within the system. Laws that promote unionization include the right to organize, bargain collectively, and strike.

Regulations that promote unionization include the requirement of employers to recognize and negotiate with unions, as well as laws that prohibit discrimination against union members. Policies that promote unionization include government support for collective bargaining and union membership.

On the other hand, laws that suppress unionization include right-to-work laws, which allow workers to choose not to join or pay dues to a union. Other regulations and policies that suppress unionization include restrictions on organizing activities, anti-union propaganda by employers, and the use of replacement workers during strikes.

To know more about unionization, refer to the link:

https://brainly.com/question/31678862#

#SPJ11

The statement that is not  true about the statute of frauds is d.A note or memorandum may be sufficient to satisfy the writing requirement.

As implied by its name, the Statute of Frauds was established to stop deception in parties' oral agreements. Emails can occasionally fulfill the criteria for an enforceable contract. Certain contracts are subject to the Statute of Frauds, which lists the conditions under which it may be binding.

A statute of frauds is a type of law that mandates that specific agreements must be recorded in writing, signed by the party against whom they are to be enforced, and with enough detail to support the agreement.

Therefore, option D is correct.

Learn more about statute of frauds at:

https://brainly.com/question/29990570

#SPJ1

Answer:

False

Explanation:

in the book of law , once a witness is able testify in court of law , he has made an oath with the government so what ever he or she says outside the court is considered admissible in trial

Answer: True

Explanation:

Senators may debate each amendment without limit unless the Senate (1) agrees to a motion ... the text of the bill; a second-degree amendment proposes to change the text of a first-degree The Senate then acts on the committee amendments, after amendment is numbered at the time it is offered and read on the floor.

Answer:

itz a case...

Explanation:

Renowned forensic scientist Henry Lee said Thursday that the O.J. Simpson double-murder trial in 1995 not only revealed the racial chasm in America but the importance of strictly following established protocols in processing crime scenes.

“There were so many issues with the major crime scene in that case,” said Mr. Lee, who holds a doctorate and who testified for five days as a defense expert for Simpson. “This case set the landmarks for crime scene and laboratory handling of evidence.’

Mr. Lee’s comments came on the first day of the two-day inaugural conference “Pioneers of Forensic Science,” at which he is the first honoree. One of the world’s foremost criminalists, Mr. Lee has been involved in the Laci Peterson, JonBenet Ramsey, Caylee Anthony and Vince Foster cases, among many others.

Mr. Lee, Connecticut’s chief emeritus of scientific services, has served as that state’s commissioner of public safety, forensic science laboratory director and chief criminalist. He is the founder of the University of New Haven’s Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science and is the namesake of its Henry C. Lee College of Criminal Justice and Forensic Sciences.

He spoke on a panel “People v. O.J. Simpson: An Interdisciplinary Retrospective on the Case that Brought Forensic Science to the World.”

Other panelists included F. Lee Bailey, a member of Simpson’s “Dream Team” of defense attorneys; Dr. Michael Baden, former chief medical examiner for New York City who also was a Simpson defense expert; and Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, Pittsburgh’s renowned forensic pathologist who was an expert commentator on the Simpson case on national television programs. He also is the namesake of Duquesne University’s Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law, the conference sponsor. University President Kenneth G. Gormley, who holds law degree, moderated the two-hour panel discussion.

A native of China, Mr. Lee said he had no idea who Mr. Simpson was when he was asked to be an expert for him at trial. He reconstructed the crime scene and examined every piece of evidence collected.

“I knew there was something wrong with the case by the physical evidence. There were lots of problems.”

He discovered that notes taken by Los Angeles Police Department criminalists at the scene were later substituted with other documents. “We found this out because the notes are stapled, but we found extra staple holes,” meaning they had been re-stapled.

Mr. Lee recounted his testimony about a crucial piece of the prosecution’s evidence—a bloodstain found on the walkway outside the Bundy Drive home where Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman were killed in June 1994.

DNA tests indicated O.J. Simpson was the likely source of the blood, but Mr. Lee testified he was suspicious because he discovered four small patches of blood on the paper packet wrapped around the Bundy evidence. That would indicate the blood swatches were wet and leaked onto the paper, yet LAPD technicians had testified that they left the swatches to dry overnight.

Asked by defense attorney Barry Scheck to account for the stains, Mr. Lee famously answered, “The only explanation I can give under these circumstances is, something’s wrong.”

As a scientist, Mr. Lee wouldn’t speculate either at the trial or at Thursday’s conference about how that could have occurred, but Mr. Bailey isn’t a scientist, so he wasn’t so circumspect. That evidence and the infamous glove and the bloody sock and anything else indicating Simpson’s guilt was planted, he said.

Answer is given below

Explanation:

The U.S. Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of federal law and has both appellate and original jurisdiction.

Appellate jurisdiction refers to the power of a court to hear appeals from lower courts. In the case of the Supreme Court, it has the authority to hear appeals from federal appellate courts as well as state supreme courts, but only if the case involves a federal question or issue. This means that the case must involve a question of federal law or the United States Constitution.

Original jurisdiction, on the other hand, refers to the power of a court to hear a case for the first time, rather than on appeal. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over a limited number of cases, such as those involving disputes between states or cases in which a foreign ambassador is a party.

In addition to its role as the ultimate arbiter of federal law, the Supreme Court also plays an important role in interpreting the Constitution. Its decisions have far-reaching implications and can shape legal precedent for years to come. As such, it is often considered one of the most powerful institutions in the United States.

learn more about federal law here

https://brainly.com/question/14867447

#SPJ11

Answer:

answer of this question is Fifth

Explanation:

May this answer is helpful for you

Answer:

What is the difference between ethical behavior and legal behavior?

The distinction is important. Actions are 'legal' if they do not violate the laws or codes of the local government, state, or federal government. ... A formally adopted code of ethics is a legal requirement; when you violate a state or local government code of ethics there are specific consequences.

Explanation:

International criminal tribunals were established by the UN following the conclusion of the Cold War to try those guilty for genocide, ethnic cleansing, and other crimes against humanity in Rwanda and other former Yugoslavian states.

International criminal tribunals were established by the UN following the conclusion of the Cold War to try people who committed crimes against humanity, genocide, and ethnic cleansing in Rwanda and former Yugoslavian nations.

The UN Security Council established the Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia to punish those responsible for those atrocities accountable and, in doing so, deter similar crimes in the future. This was done in an effort to end the widespread human suffering.

In order to "prosecute persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and neighboring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994," the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was established by the United Nations Security Council.

To learn more about Rwanda click here:

https://brainly.com/question/13731828

#SPJ4