SC admonished firecracker manufacturers for violating its orders

The Apex Court reprimanded ace firecracker manufacturers of India for using restricted chemicals like barium salts in the firecrackers. The bench considered this act of top six firecracker manufacturers as “flagrant violation” of its orders. In the instant case, the bench had been hearing an application which alleged that the firecracker manufacturers have violated the orders passed on February 10, 2017, which had banned the usage of certain chemicals. Their usage had been prohibited for the manufacture of firecrackers as the same were dangerous and beyond safety limits. The bench took into consideration the preliminary inquiry report which had been submitted by the Joint Director, Central Bureau of Investigation and recorded that its earlier orders on use of barium salts and labelling of firecrackers had not been complied with. The Additional Solicitor General, appearing for Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, submitted before the bench that various research reports had been complied and mechanisms had been suggested to make sure that the earlier orders of Courts, w.r.t. the regulation of firecrackers, are complied with. However, the bench provided one last opportunity to the respondents to put forward their case and file their counter-affidavits in the case. Also, the bench pointed out that its direction for manufacture of green firecrackers had still not been implemented. The bench did not pass any fresh orders rather, directed the manufacturers to comply with its previous orders. The Supreme Court addressed the sufferings of general public and remarked that every-day celebration, which includes burning of firecrackers, could not be allowed as the consequences surge the sufferings of asthmatic people and children, and in some cases, it results in death of patients. The post SC admonished firecracker manufacturers for violating its orders appeared first on LexForti Legal News & Journal. Did you miss our previous

Read More

Seniority benefits cannot be earned retrospectively- SC

The Apex Court, while setting aside the High Court judgment, made an observation that retrospective seniority could not be claimed as of right and that to from a date when the employee had not been even borne in service. In the instant appeal, the employer/authorities had rejected the claim of employee who had sought for seniority from the year 1985 on the ground that he had been appointed as an employee upon the direction of Supreme Court in the year 1996 and had not been borne in service in the year 1985. Upon the rejection of claim, the order had been challenged before the Patna High Court, which directed the authorities to consider employee’s seniority from 1985. Thereafter, the order of Patna High Court had been appealed before the Supreme Court and these issues had been raised – whether seniority in service could be claimed from a retrospective date; and whether the employee would be entitled to the benefits accrued from seniority from the date he entered the service. The bench referred to a catena of judgments and observed that benefit arising out of seniority accrues only after the employee joins the service. It further observed that the ruling that benefits could be earned retrospectively stand erroneous in the eyes of law. The bench explained that allowing retrospective seniority bears the tendency to affect other employees who had earlier entered into the service. While setting aside the order passed by High Court, the court held the action of authorities, in determination of employee’s seniority from the date he joined the service, stands in parlance with the governing laws. The post Seniority benefits cannot be earned retrospectively- SC appeared first on LexForti Legal News & Journal. Did you miss our previous article… https://www.itcse.org/?p=68

Read More

Better Presentations: How to Stop ‘Rough-Drafting’ and Learn to Speak with Precision

Why is it that so many lawyer presentations suffer from “hanging fragmentitis”? Here’s how to stop yourself from constantly editing, restarting and revising out loud. When we speak, why do we so often fail to finish our sentences? Linguists must know the answer to this question, but I am at a loss. All I’m sure of is this: Lawyers find it difficult — often impossible — to finish sentences. They have some kind of built-in resistance to committing to a period. Commas, ellipses and random question marks — yes. Periods — no. Here’s what I mean. A lawyer stands up to make a presentation to colleagues, an opening statement or a motion to a judge. She states her topic or theme, often (but far from always) in a single sentence. And then, she’s off to “The Land of the Never-Ending Sentence.” There isn’t a period to be heard for minutes on end: “Mrs. X has been afraid for her life since the night her husband stabbed her with a kitchen knife.” (This is the complete sentence.) “Mr. X had threatened her on numerous occasions, and the police had been … uh … called to their residence more than once and in 2009 alone officers were called by … uh … by either a neighbor or the caretaker of the condos or even by Mr. X himself … uh … on one occasion, and so she has been scared and worried, especially for the … um … effect of the potential violence on her two young daughters, who she sent away to live with her … um … sister.” And so on and on … and on. Eventually, the story emerges from the thicket of verbal litter. Participles dangle, prepositional phrases attach themselves, as if by their own accord, to the

Read More

Seven Ways You May Be Sabotaging Your Business Development Efforts

In initial meetings with lawyers, I like to have them tell me what they’ve done in marketing and business development — what has worked and what hasn’t and what they are trying to accomplish. I’ll never forget my first coaching meeting with one junior partner. When I asked her for her business development goals, her response was simple: “I just want to stop shooting myself in the foot.” She made a good point. Whether it’s informal conversations with referral sources or formal presentations with prospects, lawyers often are their own worst enemies. There are many things you should — or shouldn’t — do when faced with a business development opportunity. Avoiding missteps will vastly improve your odds of success. Seven Common Business Development Mistakes Here are some of the most common errors I see lawyers make in their business development efforts. 1. Lack of preparation. Thinking about the meeting on the drive over to the client’s office isn’t sufficient. One of the keys to an effective approach is to be well-prepared. This includes researching the company, the person, the opportunity and the competition, among other things. It also includes preparing your approach — how will you open the meeting, what roles will people play, what questions do you need answered, what are the primary points you want to make … the list goes on and on. 2. Lack of messaging. One of the goals of your preparation is to anticipate concerns or inquiries that might come up in the meeting. What objections might prospects have to hiring you? What questions might they ask about the firm or your experience? For example, a target may ask you how your firm differs from the competition. Without an appropriate and concise response at the ready, you can come off as uncertain or even defensive.

Read More

Improving Efficiency in Business – Hire a Business Consultant

A business consultant gives expert or specialist advice in a certain area like business, finances, management, accounting, law, human resource, marketing, technology, finance, science, or any other specialized field. Their advice helps businesses achieve their short and long-term goals. The main aim of a business consultant is to provide objective and innovative guidance in business. They help businesses achieve their sales targets, customer satisfaction, competitive advantage, market penetration, and customer loyalty. The main function of business consultants is to devise and implement plans for the business that is cost-effective and yield desired results. They are usually hired by businesses to get a fresh perspective and to provide the required assistance. The consulting process starts after a client has approached the firm for which he is appointing the consultant. Once the client is at the meeting with the consultant, the first step is for the two parties to establish an agreement on the fee structure and the working pattern. The overall cost of engaging a consultant can vary depending on various factors like the length of the engagement period, the specific tasks that have to be accomplished, and the project’s scope. Some business consultants begin their engagements on a contract basis, while others work on a freelance basis. Some business consultants work as independent contractors. Freelance consultant engagements tend to be less expensive since they require shorter contracts. In most cases, business consulting is done on a team basis wherein the client hires one or more consultants to work on a part-time or temporary basis. Consultants also find it easy to recruit staff and manage projects once they are self-employed. Upon hiring the first consultant, the client needs to know what he is getting for his money. In the case of short-term engagement, the consultant may suggest the client invest in

Read More