| 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     
                EU court adviser: Britain could change its mind on Brexit  
                      Stock Market News |    
                      2018/12/04 09:08 
                     | 
                   
                  
                    
                 
                      
                        A top official at the European Union's highest court advised Tuesday that Britain can unilaterally change its mind about leaving the European Union, boosting hopes among to pro-EU campaigners in the U.K. that Brexit can be stopped. 
 
Prime Minister Theresa May's government insists it will never reverse the decision to leave, but May faces a tough battle to win backing in Parliament before lawmakers vote next week on whether to accept or reject the divorce agreement negotiated with the bloc. Defeat would leave the U.K. facing a chaotic "no-deal" Brexit and could topple the prime minister, her government, or both. 
 
Advocate General Manuel Campos Sanchez-Bordona told the European Court of Justice that a decision by the British government to change its mind about invoking the countdown to departure would be legally valid. The advice of the advocate general is often, but not always, followed by the full court. 
 
The court is assessing the issue under an accelerated procedure, since Britain is due to leave the bloc on March 29. The final verdict is expected within weeks. 
 
Britain voted in 2016 to leave the 28-nation bloc, and invoked Article 50 of the EU's Lisbon Treaty in March 2017, triggering a two-year exit process. Article 50 is scant on details — largely because the idea of any country leaving the bloc was considered unlikely — so a group of Scottish legislators asked the courts to rule on whether the U.K. can pull out of the withdrawal procedure on its own. 
 
The EU's governing Commission and Council oppose unilateral revocation, arguing it requires unanimous agreement of the 27 remaining members of the bloc. 
 
The court's advocate general said that Article 50 "allows the unilateral revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU." 
 
The advice bolstered anti-Brexit campaigners, who hope the decision to leave can be reversed. 
 
"That puts the decision about our future back into the hands of our own elected representatives — where it belongs," said Jo Maugham, a British lawyer who helped bring the case. | 
                       
                     
                 
	  | 
                                    
                  
|     
                    
 | 
 
 
 
                
              
                
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     
                Poland moves to reinstate retired judges to Supreme Court  
                      Stock Market News |    
                      2018/11/20 14:52 
                     | 
                   
                  
                    
                 
                      
                        Poland's ruling party has submitted a draft law to parliament that would reinstate Supreme Court judges who were recently forced into early retirement. 
 
The development comes a month after the European Union's top court ordered Poland to immediately stop applying a law that lowered the retirement age for Supreme Court judges, forcing about two dozen of them off the bench. 
 
Poland has been in a standoff with the European Union for three years over attempts by the ruling populist Law and Justice party to impose control over the court system. The efforts have raised serious concerns over rule of law in the young democracy. 
 
Wednesday's legislative initiative marks one of the first significant steps by Poland to comply with EU demands. | 
                       
                     
                 
	  | 
                                    
                  
|     
                    
 | 
 
 
 
                
              
                
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     
                Missouri court lets redistricting initiative go to voters  
                      Stock Market News |    
                      2018/09/23 15:17 
                     | 
                   
                  
                    
                 
                      
                        A Missouri appeals court panel cleared the way Friday for voters to decide a November ballot initiative that could shake up of the state Legislature by requiring districts to be drawn to achieve "partisan fairness" and imposing new lobbying limits. 
 
The ruling overturned a decision issued a week ago by a state judge who said the so-called Clean Missouri initiative violated the state constitution by addressing multiple topics. 
 
The Western District appeals panel disagreed, ruling that the "multiple provisions all relate to a single central purpose: regulating the legislature to limit the influence of partisan or other special interests." 
 
Republican-aligned attorneys for those opposing the measure said they would appeal to the state Supreme Court. But time is running short. Missouri law sets a Tuesday deadline to make changes to the Nov. 6. ballot. The state's high court previously turned down a chance to hear the case in place of the appeals panel. 
 
As it stands, the measure would appear on the ballot as Constitutional Amendment 1. 
 
"We hope this brings an end to it and that the people can vote in November on whether they want to adopt these changes," said attorney Chuck Hatfield, who represents Clean Missouri. 
 
The initiative has been opposed in court by the president of the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry and a Republican voter who was represented by the law firm of Missouri Republican Party Chairman Todd Graves. 
 
 
 | 
                       
                     
                 
	  | 
                                    
                  
|     
                    
 | 
 
 
 
                
              
                
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     
                Arkansas court hears challenge over reworked voter ID law  
                      Stock Market News |    
                      2018/09/20 15:13 
                     | 
                   
                  
                    
                 
                      
                        An Arkansas attorney told state's highest court on Thursday it should strike down a law that requires voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot, saying the measure circumvents a 2014 ruling against a nearly identical voter ID requirement. 
 
The Arkansas Supreme Court heard arguments from the state, which is defending the law, and Jeff Priebe, who represents a Little Rock voter challenging the measure as unconstitutional. Justices in May halted a state judge's ruling preventing Arkansas from enforcing the voter ID law, keeping it in place while they consider the case. 
 
The high court in 2014 struck down a previous version of the voter ID law as unconstitutional. The revived voter ID law, which was approved last year, requires voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot. Unlike the previous measure, the new law allows voters to cast provisional ballots if they sign a sworn statement confirming their identities. 
 
"It's closing the ballot booth doors," Priebe said during the roughly hour-long hearing. 
 
Arkansas officials argue the new law complies with part of the Supreme Court's ruling striking down the 2013 measure. Justices in 2014 unanimously struck down the previous voter ID law, with a majority of the court ruling it unconstitutionally added a qualification to vote. Three justices, however, ruled the measure didn't get the two-thirds vote needed to change voter registration requirements. A majority of the court has changed hands since that ruling, and more than two-thirds of the House and Senate approved the new measure last year. 
 
Deputy Secretary of State A.J. Kelly told the justices the lower court "has usurped the power of the Legislature to amend the Constitution" by blocking the law. "A single man has a driver's license and refuses to show it to vote, and he alone has put a constitutional amendment in jeopardy," Kelly said. 
 
Justices did not indicate when they would rule. If they strike the law, it wouldn't affect a separate proposal on the ballot in November that would put a voter ID requirement in the state's constitution. 
 
The court is considering the case weeks before voters head to the polls in an election where national Democrats are trying to flip a Little Rock-area congressional seat currently held by a Republican. Justice Courtney Goodson, who wrote the concurring opinion four years ago citing the two-thirds vote as the reason for striking the previous law, is seeking re-election in November in a race that has already drawn heavy spending from conservative groups opposing her bid. | 
                       
                     
                 
	  | 
                                    
                  
|     
                    
 | 
 
 
 
                
              
                
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     | 
                   
                  
                     
                Filing period opens for West Virginia Supreme Court seat  
                      Stock Market News |    
                      2018/08/06 09:04 
                     | 
                   
                  
                    
                 
                      
                        The filing period has begun for a special election for the West Virginia Supreme Court. 
 
The filing period for the unexpired seat of former Justice Menis Ketchum started Monday and runs through Aug. 21. The special election will be held concurrently with the Nov. 6 general election. 
 
Candidates must be at least 30 years old, residents of West Virginia for at least five years and admitted to practice law for at least 10 years. 
 
Ketchum announced his retirement last month. He had two years remaining in his term. 
 
Last week prosecutors said Ketchum has agreed to plead guilty in federal court to one count of wire fraud stemming from the personal use of state-owned vehicles and fuel cards. He faces a plea hearing and up to 20 years in prison. | 
                       
                     
                 
	  | 
                                    
                  
|     
                    
 | 
 
 
 
                
              
              
 |            
      
          
                
                   | 
                 
                 
                
                     				
                 
                    
                      
                        
		
	| 
		
		
		 
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		 
		
		
		
			  | 
			
				
					Investment Fraud Litigation   | 
				  
			 | 
		  
		
		 
	 |   
 | 
                       
                     
										
                    								
                  
                    
	
                   								
		
                    
	    
                    
 
 
          
 | 
  
  
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.  
 |  
 
  
  | 
                 
              | 
            
           
          
            |   | 
           
          
            |   | 
           
          
            |   | 
           
          
             | 
           
         
 The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo | 
  
 
      	
	 |