Alexa Morena Moorehead is the 2016 presidential candidate of Workers World Party. With a father who was a basketball coach and a mother who admired Joe Louis, Jackie Robinson and Muhammad Ali, Moorehead says she has “always made it a point to watch the Summer and Winter Olympic Games as far back as I can remember.”I will never forget the 1968 Summer Games in Mexico City when track and field sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos, who won the gold and bronze medals, respectively, in the 200-meter dash, carried out a heroic protest against the racist repression of Black people in the U.S. They bowed their heads and thrust their proud black-gloved fists in the air during the playing of the National Anthem. That protest drove home the point that the Olympics are not even close to being devoid of social inequality.And it was true of the recent Summer Games of the 31st Olympiad held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil — the first South American country ever to host the Olympics.Over 11,000 athletes from over 200 countries participated in the games. The International Olympics Committee estimated that about half of the world’s population, 3.5 billion people, watched at least one minute of the games, whether on television or streaming on the Internet. For two weeks in August, the majority of the world’s people were inundated not only with astonishing athletic skills, but with bourgeois propaganda that reinforced the double standard separating people of color, women and transgender athletes from white male athletes.It started with the opening ceremony when NBC commentator Meredith Vieira stated that the Portuguese “immigrated” to Brazil. She failed to mention that the Portuguese brought the slave trade to Brazil, which resulted in Brazil becoming home to the largest African diaspora in the world.Gabby Douglas from the U.S., who during the London Olympics in 2012 had won the gold medal as best individual all-around gymnast, was horribly ridiculed on Twitter for not placing her hand over her heart when the national anthem was played after she and her teammates won the best all-around team medal in Rio. Douglas, who is African-American, felt compelled to apologize for not being “patriotic” enough. She also faced a sexist backlash for not wearing her hair in a certain manner and not smiling enough. Douglas left Rio before the closing ceremony.Compare Douglas’ treatment to that of Ryan Lochte. The white gold-medal-winning swimmer was caught lying to the Brazilian government, claiming to be the victim of an armed robbery, when in fact he had been intoxicated and helped destroy a gas station bathroom. He was initially treated with kid gloves. The 32-year-old was described as a “kid” who deserved a “break” — a far cry from how 20-year-old Douglas was treated. (Huffingtonpost.com, Aug. 18)Sexism dominated the OlympicsThe Olympics were riddled with general and individual sexist comments against women. John Miller, an NBC Olympics’ chief marketing officer, stated, “The people who watch the Olympics are not particularly sports fans. More women watch the Games than men, and for the women, they’re less interested in the result and more interested in the journey. It’s sort of like the ultimate reality show and mini-series wrapped into one.” (fusion.net)When Simone Manuel became the first African-American woman to win a gold medal in swimming, the original headline in the Mercury News did not even mention her name. It read: “Michael Phelps shares historic night with African-American.” The News issued an apology to Manuel, who spoke out against police brutality after her victory.A 99-pound gymnast from Mexico, Alexa Morena, was accused of being too “fat.” The spouse of the Hungarian gold-medal-winning swimmer, Katinka Hosszú, was given “credit” for her victory. Bronze-medal winner for trap shooting Corey Cogdell-Unrein was described in the Chicago Tribune as the “wife of a Bears lineman.”The achievements of multiple gold-medal winners like gymnast Simone Biles and swimmer Katie Ledeky were also denigrated. Biles was described as the “next Michael Phelps” and the “next Usain Bolt.” Her response on Twitter was, “I am the first Simone Biles.” NBC commentator Rowdy Gaines stated that Ledeky was so good that “Some people say she swims like a man.” Ryan Lochte said that Ledeky has “strokes like a guy.”The brilliant South African runner Caster Semenya, who won the 800-meter track and field race, faced racism and transphobia in Rio. Semenya, a Black woman, has faced bigoted scrutiny for the past seven years on the part of the International Association of Athletics Federations, which have questioned whether she can compete as a woman due to a genetic condition known as hyperandrogenism, which gives her a raised testosterone level.Even though she won the gold medal, the IAAF is still investigating her, which has led to a certain level of racist and sexist scrutiny on the part of other athletes. When she attempted to congratulate two of her white competitioners, Melissa Bishop of Canada and Lynsey Sharp of Great Britain, they both completely ignored her. Poland’s Joanna Jozwik, who finished fifth, stated: “I’m glad I’m the first European, the second white.”Semenya responded, “It is not about discriminating [against] people and looking at people in terms of how they look, how they speak and how they have run. … It’s not about being masculine. It’s about sports.” (theguardian.com, Aug. 23)The main source for information in this article is fusion.net.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this Caster Semenya Gabby Douglass Tommie Smith and John Carlos Simone Biles
May Day — International Workers Day — is celebrated around the world, including in the United States. It is a time when workers show their strength, demand their rights and forge global solidarity. Its roots are in the struggle for the eight-hour day in 1886 in Chicago.Some issues stood out at this year’s commemorative marches and rallies. Solidarity with im/migrants is key. It is more important than ever as Washington is carrying out a brutal war against im/migrants and has unleashed Immigration Customs and Enforcement agents to hunt down, arrest and deport them, in violation of all civil and human rights. Government agencies are viciously separating children from their parents, only to return the adults to countries from which they fled, and in many cases, losing track of the children.Activists hailed the migrant caravan from Central America, which the Trump administration has stopped at the U.S.-Mexico border. The chief White House xenophobe has whipped up racist hostility to the families, who are mostly mothers and children, making it nearly impossible for them to enter the U.S. Demands for im/migrant rights and an end to ICE assaults and deportations rang out loudly and clearly on May Day.Another major theme of several May Day actions was support for the growing wave of teacher and education worker walkouts spreading throughout much of the country demanding higher pay, collective bargaining rights and funding for public schools. Organized and unorganized workers and other progressive forces showed support for these courageous school workers fighting back against right-wing politicians and Big Oil.Many May Day marches called for higher pay, workplace safety and unionization for all low-wage workers. Important social justice struggles were addressed, such as support for Black Lives Matter and opposition to racist police violence. Protesters called for an end to mass incarceration and the school-to-prison pipeline.Local issues were addressed, too, such as demands to end racist gentrification, evictions and utility shutoffs. Also raised was the importance of fighting for necessities and rights of people with disabilities, women and LGBTQ people.Global solidarity was a focus, too. Marchers expressed support for the people of Puerto Rico, so arrogantly mistreated and neglected by Washington. Links were made between repression at home and abroad, including in the Philippines. Many rallies expressed solidarity with the global workforce and decried its exploitation by U.S. imperialism.Here are highlights of actions in which Workers World Party participated.BostonNortheastHundreds of workers representing various groups gathered on May 1 in East Boston to fight for migrants’ and workers’ rights.They marched to Chelsea, where they met contingents from local organizations and then jointly marched from there to Everett, where they held a rally. Signs and banners focused on the connected struggles of undocumented im/migrants and the need to maintain the government policies of temporary protected status and DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). They also demanded a living wage, workplace safety and unions.The May 1 Coalition, comprised of several labor unions and Latinx community organizations, organized and lead the march, as it has in Boston for several years. Chants called out ICE, the White House bigot in chief and Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker and also expressed solidarity with all workers.Unions which had contingents in the march included the New England Carpenters Union; Steelworkers Local 8751, Boston School Bus Drivers; UNITE HERE Local 26; Boston Teachers Union; and Food and Commercial Workers Local 1445.—Belladonna AshmanBuffalo, N.Y.In Buffalo, N.Y., WWP organized a May Day rally in support of migrant struggles and in solidarity with participants in the migrant caravan, organized by Pueblos Sin Fronteras, who are currently awaiting asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border. The May 1 rally targeted ICE headquarters in Buffalo, drawing attention to their agents’ role in the repression and terror against undocumented im/migrants.—Nigel BouvartUnion Square, New York CityFor over a decade, the May Day demonstrations at Union Square have been the left pole of these celebrations in New York City. The state has always targeted actions on this workers’ day, but in the last year, repression has escalated. Despite an unprecedented number of officers policing the event and more arrests in 2017, a coalition of over 60 groups gathered to commemorate May Day in historic Union Square once again.Included were BAYAN USA, 1804 Movement for All Immigrants, WWP, Teamsters Local 808, Nodutdol for Korean Community Development, Comedores Sociales, Within Our Lifetime – United for Palestine, Almighty Latin Kings and Queens, the Columbia Graduate Workers Union and Freedom Road Socialist Organization.It was an upward battle, as the NYC Parks Department refused the coalition a permit for the south side of Union Square where May Day commemorations have been held as far back as 1910. Ultimately, over 1,000 people joined together to raise struggles against white supremacy and exploitation in this city and across the country, and denounced U.S. imperialism.—John SteffinPhiladelphiaMid-Atlantic/SouthTwo major demonstrations took over Philadelphia on May Day. Stadium Stompers and community organizations based in North Philadelphia targeted Temple University’s racist gentrification plans to destroy the Black neighborhood adjacent to the campus. Around 200 marchers shut down traffic, calling for the end of Temple’s proposed $130 million football stadium, chanting “No Stadium! No Deal!”Juntos, Decarcerate PA, and other organizations hosted a May Day rally entitled “Break the Cages! Fund the People!” at City Hall. Five hundred activists and community members attended. It opposed ICE’s aggressive increase in raids and deportations here and targeted the school-to-prison pipeline. Philadelphia ICE agents arrest and deport more migrants without criminal convictions than any other U.S. city.WWP attended both actions — supporting the march against gentrification and in solidarity with migrants and Black and Brown youth facing increasing incarceration and deportation, and raising solidarity with the people of Puerto Rico facing genocidal austerity.— Scott MichaelBaltimoreCommunity, union, student and youth activists joined together to mark May Day with a downtown march to the offices of ICE and the housing commission, police headquarters and finally to City Hall, to highlight the many issues impacting workers and the unemployed in Baltimore. Police tried to prevent the group from marching, but participants’ determination foiled their efforts.A highlight of the first rally was a talk by Sara Benjamin, a young Cherry Hill teacher, who displayed a homemade piece of artwork with a message from her students for May Day.At the end of the march, the group unfurled a special banner with a message to the people of Puerto Rico — especially to the striking teachers — proclaiming Baltimore’s support for them and demanding reparations for the island, so badly damaged by hurricanes, then abused by Washington.The May Day March was sponsored by the Peoples Power Assembly, Women and Oppressed Genders Fightback Network; Youth Against War & Racism; BMORE; Hopkins Tzedek; WWP; Students for a Democratic Society/Johns Hopkins University; Baltimore Bus Riders Union; Baltimore city and county Green Party; and Greater Baltimore Democratic Socialists of America.—WW Baltimore bureauWashington, D.C.WWP’s D.C. branch joined in the DC May Day Festival in Washington, D.C., put on by groups like Democracy at Work, DSA, Socialist Alternative, Industrial Workers of the World and the Socialist Party of DC. They set up a table with great placards, sign-up sheets, newspapers and snacks. The group got a lot of sign-ups and was very well-received.—Andrew MaytonDurham, N.C.Local grassroots organizations in Durham, N.C., including the Durham Worker’s Assembly, WWP Durham branch, Black Youth Project 100, DSA, IWW, United Electrical Workers Local 150, Durham Beyond Policing and Comité Popular Somos Raleigh, gathered at the old Durham police station. They demanded a $15 hourly wage and unionization — and an end to ICE raids and deportations and police brutality.The crowd of 200 marched to the jail downtown. Across the street, the Durham Performing Arts Center held a musical about the service industry. Speakers told confused ticket holders waiting in line what real workers’ struggles look like. Marchers then returned to the streets and went to a MacDonald’s restaurant downtown and drew the connections between the bosses, police and jails.—Workers World Durham bureauDetroitMidwestRallies and a march took place in the Latinx community in Detroit’s southwest side. Participants gathered at Clark Park for the first rally and then marched through the neighborhood in support of im/migrant rights, civil rights, self-determination for oppressed peoples, Black and Brown unity, rights for disabled people, workers’ struggles for a living wage and other issues.The event concluded at Clark Park with a closing rally calling for a halt to all water shut-offs, home foreclosures and evictions. Speakers expressed solidarity with workers and oppressed peoples worldwide. May Day 2018 was organized by a broad coalition of forces, including the Moratorium NOW! Coalition, Michigan United, the Poor Peoples’ Campaign, Detroit Active and Retired Employees Association and numerous other groups.— Abayomi AzikiweChicagoIn Chicago, hundreds gathered at Haymarket Square, site of the Haymarket affair, when police killed workers fighting for an 8-hour workday in 1886. Speakers from labor unions, im/migrants’ rights groups, socialist organizations and faith-based leaders demanded a living wage for all workers, an end to racist deportations and a stop to police murders of people of color.Everyone marched to Chicago’s Federal Building, the operations base for ICE. At the rally there, speakers denounced the agency’s role in splitting up families, terrorizing communities and repressing im/migrant workers. Immediately after the rally, religious leaders from predominantly im/migrant communities began the first leg of a planned procession on foot from Chicago to Washington, D.C., to protest the repeal of DACA and deportation policies.—Andi ShihadehWaukesha, Wis.In the Midwest, WWP had a robust presence this year, with members promoting and in solidarity with events called by mass organizations, such as May Day in Waukesha, Wis. Hosted by Youth Empowered in the Struggle and Voces de la Frontera, this was a massive protest of the local sheriff’s plan to have his deputies start detaining im/migrants for ICE in June.MinneapolisOn May Day, 500 people marched through the heart of Minneapolis to repudiate the racist imperialist system of the U.S. A coalition of groups attended, which included Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee, IWW and union locals. The newly formed WWP Twin Cities branch carried a banner stressing that, despite the borders that cause geographical separation, the workers’ struggle connects across the world. Onlookers responded enthusiastically to protest slogans as the marchers’ calls of “No Trump! No KKK! No Racist USA!” echoed down the avenues.—WW Twin Cities bureauTucson, Ariz.SouthwestMay Day in Tucson, Ariz., was dedicated to #RedForEd. Thousands of people gathered in downtown’s Armory Park for a rally to demand increased funding for education. Speakers condemned the school-to-prison pipeline, state funding of prisons and the outrageous sums spent on militarizing the border. They also connected the teachers’ struggle to the many other struggles for justice, including Black Lives Matter and supporting im/migrants against hostile federal and state agencies and policies.One speaker noted that any disruption caused to students by the teacher walkout is nothing compared to the disruption to them caused by the ever-present terror of ICE and Border Patrol agents who cruise Tucson streets and daily tear families apart. The rally was followed by a spirited march through the streets of downtown Tucson.—Paul TeitelbaumLos AngelesWest CoastHundreds rallied and marched on May Day at MacArthur Park in Los Angeles, and then marched to City Hall. Unión del Barrio and anti-war and social justice organizations initiated the demonstration. The majority of those attending came from the city’s large im/migrant population.For a time, participants thought that WWP organizer and Brazilian immigrant, Jefferson Azevedo, had been arrested. Security forces from Unión del Barrio, California for Progress and WWP surrounded a Trump supporter who was talking to police and trying to get onto the stage truck. The reactionary attacked a woman member of California for Progress and Azevedo, whom the police handcuffed.Demonstrators surrounded Azevedo. Chants of “Let him go!” resounded from the crowd and stage to the phalanx of cops, some of whom were hanging onto him. The cops finally removed the handcuffs, but wouldn’t release Azevedo. Organizers moved their truck across Wilshire Boulevard, one of the busiest traffic corridors in the U.S., and blocked this kidnapping. Within five minutes, Azevedo was freed, and the march took to the streets all the way to City Hall for a great rally.—Scott SchefferSan DiegoOn May Day in San Diego, 500 people gathered at historic Chicano Park in the Barrio Logan neighborhood for an evening rally. Members of organizations and other individuals gathered around the famous Aztec kiosk to listen to teachers, union organizers and other workers speak about the history and importance of May Day, and the wave of teachers’ strikes that has hit the country. Chants of “¡Sí, se puede!” and “Shut it down!” rang out throughout the community between speeches, led by Unión Del Barrio, initiator of the rally and march.San Diego’s Azteca dancers performed and then led everyone in a march through the residential areas of Barrio Logan and Sherman Heights. At the end of the march, Unión Del Barrio offered more time for speakers, after which the program ended with a performance by Ballet Folklórico and music.Some participating organizations were WWP San Diego, the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee, Committee Against Police Brutality, San Diego Educators Association, Party for Socialism and Liberation, IWW, DSA, Democratic Autonomy Federation, Redneck Revolt, United Domestic Workers of America, UNITE HERE Local 30, and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union.—Rahui Suré Saldivar-SotoILWU Local 10 held an eight-hour shutdown at the port of Oakland.Oakland, Calif.In a day highlighted by the unity of labor and im/migrant communities, over 1,000 people demanded “No Ban! No Raids! No Wall! Sanctuary for All!” “Stop Police Repression!” and “Workers Rights for All!” Actions began at the Port of Oakland, in California, where ILWU Local 10 held an eight-hour port shutdown. Their members and community supporters rallied at the Matson Terminal, then marched to Little Bobby Hutton Park.Speakers included actor Danny Glover; Oakland mayoral candidate Cat Brooks, Anti Police-Terror Project; Sequita Thompson, grandmother of Stephon Clark, killed by police; Yolanda Banks Reed, mother of Shaleem Tindle, slain by police and Sagnicthe Salazar of the Oakland Sin Fronteras im/migrant rights May Day coalition. Producer Ryan Coogler’s video message was played.Clarence Thomas, ILWU Local 10 retiree, chanted: “Immigrant rights are workers’ rights and workers’ rights are immigrant rights!”The Oakland Sin Fronteras rally and march began at Oscar Grant Plaza in downtown Oakland. Large contingents from Bay Area im/migrant communities carried colorful banners showing their diversity. The coalition’s unity statement said: “International Workers Day is a time to uplift the struggles, honor the sacrifices, and celebrate the triumphs of im/migrants and workers across the world. As we stand on Ohlone Indigenous land … we march in solidarity with working people across all borders fighting against economic and social inequality.“With a Trump administration in power, a rising fascist tendency, and growing … oppression of people everywhere, this May Day we march in the spirit of ‘No Ban! No Raids! No Wall! Sanctuary for All!’ from state violence and capitalist exploitation and toward liberation and self-determination.”— Terri KayPortland, Ore.The Portland, Ore., WWP branch — as part of the Portland May Day Coalition — participated in a May Day celebration that brought together many left groups for a community focused event. Over 200 people turned out at Lents Park in the city’s southeast area.Comrades from the Philippines, representing groups including BAYAN, ICHRP-US and Gabriela, attended, as well as members of the Stop The Killings speaking tour 2018. The latter group is protesting the brutal Duterte regime in the Philippines. Members of Indigenous and im/migrant rights groups spoke and performed dances and songs. Free food was distributed to participants. WWP members set up a booth, distributed literature, talked to many people about the Party and its important work and formed closer ties with friendly organizations in the Portland area.—Josh HanksFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
Know the LawArbitration: Court Reckoner [June 2020] Kanika Singh18 July 2020 6:52 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 June 2020 under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. 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…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 June 2020 under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. 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 2 (1)(e) In Golden Edge Engineering P. Ltd. v Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. , the High Court of Calcutta was considering a clause in the contract which provided that “the seat of arbitration shall be Kolkatta (the place from where the contract is issued)”. The Court held that the seat would have to be determined taking into account the bracketed portion and the tender being issued from Salt Lake and not Kolkatta (albeit electronically but the Court relied on S. 13(3) of the Information Technology Act), the High Court of Calcutta would not be the competent court for entertaining an application under S. 9 of the Act. SECTION 2(2) In Goodwill Non-woven P. Ltd. v XCoal Energy & Resources LLC High Court of Delhi rejected the contention that in case of an international commercial arbitration, the jurisdiction vested in an Indian Court under proviso to S. 2(2) of the Act for entertaining an application under S. 9 is an asset based jurisdiction, which can be exercised only when the asset(s) of the counter party against which, the order is sought to be enforced are situated in India. It held that the word used in S. 9 is ‘a party’ which denotes any party can file an application and further held that for the purpose of passing an order/interim measure, the availability of asset in India is irrelevant and sub-sections (a), (b) & (c) of S. 9 contemplate passing of orders for interim measure of protection which do not pre-suppose the existence of asset(s) of a foreign party in India. However, on the facts of the case, the Court declined to pass an interim measure of protection holding that no prima facie case was made out and it is not an exceptional case where there is adequate material on record leading to a definite conclusion that the respondent is likely to render the entire arbitration proceedings infructuous by frittering away the properties or funds. SECTION 7 In Quick heal Technologies Ltd. v NCS Computech P. Ltd. High Court of Bombay held that the use of the word ‘may’ in the arbitration clause shows that there was no consensus between the parties with regard to arbitration and they only agreed to provide fresh consent (by use of the word “may”) in order to proceed with the arbitration and as no fresh consent to proceed with any arbitration has been provided by any of the Respondents, there is no valid arbitration clause under which any Arbitrator can be appointed. SECTION 9 In Bhubaneshwar Expressways P. Ltd. v National Highways Authority of India , the short question before the High Court of Delhi was that could a bank guarantee, which had been directed by the Court to be submitted by the petitioner to secure the claim in arbitration, be furnished by a third party on the Petitioner’s behalf, which third party had no connection with the contract with the parties. The Court answered the said question in the affirmative and held that a bank guarantee being a contract between the bankers and the beneficiaries, the Respondent for the purpose of the bank guarantee has to deal with the guarantor, namely, the bankers and not the party, at the instance of whom, the bank guarantee has been given. In Suzlon Energy Ltd. v Zemira Renewable Energy Ltd. & Anr., the High Court of Delhi reiterated the position of law that merely because invocation of bank guarantee would cause financial distress to the Petitioner therein, who was stated to be undergoing Corporate Debt Restructuring Process, cannot be a ground to invoke the exception of irretrievable injury to be entitled for a stay on invocation/encashment of bank guarantee nor could any serious disputes on the merits of respective claims be urged as grounds to seek injunction against invocation. In Overnite Express Limited v Delhi Metro Rail Corporation  High Court of Delhi was considering a petition filed under Section 9, inter alia, seeking restraint against taking of coercive steps under a License Agreement and raising of invoices for license fees. The Court, upon consideration of the terms of the license agreements, held that the same are by their nature very determinable and thus no injunction against termination of the agreements can be granted as sought by petitioner as the same would be statutorily barred in view of Section 14(1)(c) r/w S. 41(e) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and similarly no injunction against raising of invoices can be granted as that would also indirectly amount to enforcement of the agreements and thus also statutorily prohibited. It further held that the contentions of parties touching upon the merits of the claims including alleged breaches and invoices towards License Fee, as well as the interpretation of the Term ‘as is where is basis’ will be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal as and when constituted. In Blue Coast Infrastructure Development P. Ltd. v Blue Coast Hotels Ltd. & Anr., High Court of Delhi held that a Court in a Section 9 petition, unlike an Arbitrator under S 17 petition, can pass interim measure against non-parties to the arbitration including a third party who holds possession of a property for one of the parties to arbitration applying the principles of Order 38 Rule 6 CPC. However, on the facts of the case, it held, that no interim measures can be passed against the third party as the property in the form of monies that was being held by the said party was itself subject to certain other orders of the Court passed in a separate proceeding. In Rashmi Cement Ltd. v World Metals & Alloys (FZC) & Anr., High Court of Delhi while dealing with a S. 9 Petition seeking certain interim measures in the nature of mandatory injunction relying on the force majeure clause in the contract between parties, held that while ambit of interim protections that can be granted under S 9 is broad and would include mandatory injunctions, there is the three pronged test for grant of same, viz., prima facie case in its favour, balance of convenience in its favour and, most importantly, evidence of irretrievable injury that would be suffered in case protection is not granted. Applying the said test, it held, on the facts of the case, that the Petitioner has not been able to establish a prima facie case or balance of convenience in its favour, however clarified that the question whether the force majeure clause in the case stood attracted or not would have to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal in the final analysis. The Court also observed that the government circulars on force majeure may not be binding on private parties governed by a private contract. In Aakash Educational Services Ltd. v Sahib Sital Singh Bajwa & Ors., High Court of Delhi refused to grant interim protection in the form of enforcement of a negative covenant contained in the agreement between the parties which prevented the Respondent, who had been a franchisee of the Petitioner, from running a similar coaching centre for a period of two years after termination of the franchise agreement. The High Court accepted the Respondent’s contention that the negative covenant to restrict trade, busines or profession of the respondents after termination of the agreement would be hit by Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. SECTION 11 In DSC Venture P. Ltd. v Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, UOI, the High Court of Delhi was dealing with the question that whether the time period of 30 days provided in S. 11(6) would apply to appointment of a substitute arbitrator under S 15(2) and whether a party who did not appoint the substitute arbitrator within such period of 30 days and even till date of filing of petition under S. 11 by the other party, had lost the right to appoint a substitute arbitrator and appointment made post the said period of 30 days was void ab initio. The High Court held that appointment of a substitute arbitrator would have to be as per the rules that were applicable for appointment of the arbitrator sought to be substituted namely the arbitration clause between the parties providing for manner of appointment and as the clause in the case at hand did not provide any time period and on the contrary required the Petitioner to call upon Respondent to appoint its nominee arbitrator, then in the absence of such notice/demand, no time period for appointment of substitute arbitrator had starting running and the right of the Respondent appoint arbitrator did not get extinguished. The Court further held that there can be no deemed failure, on the part of either party, to comply with the procedure, stipulated in the contract, for appointment of arbitrator. It is only if the party defaults in doing so, in violation either of the arbitration clause, or of any mandatory statutory prescription – or proscription –that the autonomy, of the party, to appoint an arbitrator, becomes imperilled, and not otherwise. In Afcons Infrastructure Limited v Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., High Court of Bombay held that as per Section 21 of the Act, the arbitration would be treated to have commenced on the date request for reference to arbitration is received and on the said basis held that the standing arbitral Tribunal constituted, for an earlier dispute between the same parties, and constituted prior to coming into force of the Amendment Act, 2015 certainly would not clear the test of law when the arbitration in case of the present dispute itself commenced after the Amendment Act, 2015 came into force and when the constitution of the said Standing Tribunal is hit by the provisions of the Amendment Act and the subsequent judicial pronouncements in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v HSCC (India) Ltd. Section 14 In Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. v State of Haryana & Anr., High Court of Punjab & Haryana, while dealing with an arbitration clause which empowered the State of Haryana to appoint the arbitrator in a dispute involving a government PSU and a contractor, held that admittedly the appointing authority was not a party to the contract and merely because of State of Haryana has some financial interest in setting up of the PSU or has a nominee in its Board would not ipso facto mean that it has any interest in the arbitral proceedings and held that if the same was to be treated as a disqualification from exercising power to appoint arbitrator, then in every dispute involving a State Board, Corporation , organization etc , the State Governments would not be in a position to appoint arbitrator and held the appointment so made was not against the ratio of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. TRF Limited v Energo Engineering Project Ltd and Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v HSCC (India) Ltd. Further, while rejecting the Petitioner’s objection that the State of Haryana has appointed the same arbitrator as suggested by the PSU in an internal noting, held that the same is not proof of the fact that the Government did not independently apply its mind before selecting the arbitrator or that the PSU had a role in the appointment. In Entertainment City Ltd. v Aspek Media P. Ltd., High Court of Delhi was considering a petition for termination of mandate of the Arbitrator on the ground that the fees sought to be charged by the Arbitrator was in violation of S. 11(14) and the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act and the same would be covered under S. 12(4) of the Act as being a ground for challenging the appointment of the arbitrator or in the alternative by S. 14(1)(a). The Court held that S. 12(4) cannot be read as a standalone provision and has to be read in conjunction with S. 12(3). On the alternative argument, the Court held that while there is no doubt that if the fees charged by the arbitrator were in contravention of the provisions of the Act, then the same may be regarded as de jure inability to attract the provisions of S. 14(1), however, held, that on facts of the case there was no such violation as no rules have been framed under S. 11(14) of the Act by the High Court of Delhi, whereby fees of Arbitrators, directly appointed by the court, could be governed and thus no ground for termination of mandate of Arbitrator is made out. SECTION 34 In M/s Chintels India Ltd. v M/S. Bhayana Builders P. Ltd. High Court of Delhi held that engagement of a new counsel or clarification in case number of a connected award are not grounds that would constitute ‘sufficient cause’ to merit condonation of delay in filing under Section 34 (3) of the Act and refused to condone delay of 28 days in filing the petition. In Indira Gandhi National Open University v M/s. Sharat Das & Associates P. Ltd. High Court of Delhi reiterated the legal position that when a petition is filed under Section 34(3) of the Act, it must not be a mere bunch of papers but must fulfil vital parameters, to qualify as valid filing. The Court held that filing of Vakalatnama, Statement of Truth and signing of the petition are vital for any petition to be termed as proper filing and a petition filed without them would be a non est filing and it is the date when the defects are cured in such a case which will be treated as the date of fresh filing and not re-filing. Since in the present case, the said date goes beyond the 120th day, petition would be treated as having been initially filed beyond the limitation period and the extended period of 30 days. It further held that the CPC and its Amendments would apply to petitions under Section 34 of the Act being heard by the Commercial Division of this Court. The Court further rejected the contention that the defects in Vakalatnama /Statement of Truth, being curable, under Rule 15A can be can be permitted to be cured after the period of limitation or the extended period of 30 days under Section 34(3) of the Act expires. The Court held that if the Court was to hold that non-filing of Vakalatnama, Statement of Truth is a curable defect and it is open to an Objector to file a petition, lacking the vital documents and then cure the defects at his will, it would clearly be against the principles laid down in several judgments which mandate the filing of these vital documents within the period of limitation and this is in keeping with the strict timelines under Section 34(3) of the Act, so that the purpose of expeditious disposal under a special dispute resolution mechanism, is not defeated. In Sharma Kalypso P. Ltd. v Engineers India Ltd. High Court of Delhi rejected the contention that filing of a defective vakalatnama at the time of initial filing of the objection petition would make the said filing non est and the date of re-filing would have to be considered as date of fresh filing. The Court held that once a Vakalatnama was initially filed, though with certain defects, a filing of a fresh Vakalatnama, without any defect, cannot be treated as a deficiency of a threshold which could lead to dismissal of a petition as ‘non-est’. It further held that once the initial filing is within the 3 months limitation period or the extended 30 days, and is a valid filing, then refilling has to be looked at with a liberal approach and secondly, even if the re-filing is beyond the period specified under Section 34(3) of the Act, it can be condoned. In NHPC Limited v BHS-SGS Soma JV High Court of Delhi held that the question whether petition upon filing in correct forum/court after being returned ought to be treated as an entirely fresh petition and not a re-presentation of the original petition as returned, is not a consideration to deprive the petitioner of the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The Court further held that assessing whether an action of filing a petition in a wrong forum/court was carried out in good faith and was with due diligence, cannot be carried out in abstract and would depend on a careful and thorough analysis of the facts of each case and on the facts of the case held that Petitioner satisfied both the tests to be entitled to get benefit under S. 14 of the Limitation Act. It further held that while a party cannot seek exclusion of period before initiation of proceedings before a wrong forum, however once proceedings are initiated time spent in taking preparatory steps for filing the appeal ought to be excluded. In Union of India v Great Eastern Energy Corporation Limited High Court of Delhi held that an order of Arbitral Tribunal directing payment of costs to the opposite party, on account of delay in placing on record expert evidence, during pending of arbitral proceedings is not an interim award and to qualify as an interim award amenable to challenge under S. 34, the subject matter of arbitration and rights of the parties in respect thereof have to be finally decided. In NTPC Ltd. v Sri Avantika Contractors (I) (Ltd.)High Court of Delhi, while refusing to interfere with an arbitral award on the ground that the Arbitral Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction by adjudicating on excepted matters, held that the Tribunal has arrived at a finding as to how the claim before it was not an excepted matter, based on the interpretation of the contractual clauses as well as the technical interpretation and it is not open to the Court at the stage of S. 34 petition to substitute the said findings, more particularly, when as per settled law, the Arbitrator is the master of quality and quantity of evidence before it. The Court further held that Manner and methodology of calculation, application of formulas and interpretation of contractual clauses is purely the domain of the Tribunal and must pass muster. The Court, however, set aside the award with regards to loss of profit on the ground that the same was without any actual proof. In Slum Rehabilitation Authority v M.M. Project Consultants Private LimitedHigh Court of Bombay while setting aside the arbitral award, inter alia, held that reasoning given by the Tribunal would amount to observing something contrary to clause of the contract or putting the parties in a position contrary to the relevant contractual condition and the said reasoning was thus a perversity. It held that although it would be in the domain of the arbitral tribunal to interpret contractual clauses and appreciate evidence, it has to be a reasonable and prudent interpretation and appreciation of evidence and not something which is impossible to be conceived by any reasonable standards leading to an absurdity. The Court also held that a claim for damages cannot be made by a party to have any unjust enrichment or it should not confer a windfall on the claimant and cannot exceed the loss actually suffered or likely to be suffered and the damages awarded have to be compensatory and not punitive or retributory. In Gammon India Ltd & Anr. v NHAI High Court of Delhi held that while a perusal of S. 7(1),8(3) & 21 of the Act makes it clear that multiple references and arbitrations are permissible at multiple stages of a contract/project but multiplicity should be avoided to prevent misuse of remedy of arbitration and the Court laid down the following principles to be followed in such cases (i) for a particular contract/series of contracts, endeavour always ought to be to make one reference to one Arbitral Tribunal (ii) party invoking arbitration ought to raise all claims that have already arisen on the date of invocation for reference to arbitration. A claim arisen on the date of invocation and is not mentioned, either in the invocation letter or in the terms of reference, such claim ought to be held as being barred/waived, unless permitted to be raised by Arbitral Tribunal for any legally justifiable/sustainable reasons (iii) in case an Arbitral Tribunal stands constituted, future reference should ordinarily be made to same Arbitral Tribunal to avoid contradictory findings and if same is not possible at least challenges to the Awards ought to be heard together (iv) while filing S. 11 or 34 petitions, party to disclose the number of arbitration references, Arbitral Tribunals or court proceedings pending or adjudicated in respect of the same contract and if so, the stage of the said proceedings. In Prakash Industries Limited v Bengal Energy Ltd & Anr. High Court of Calcutta rejected the application for amendment of S. 34 petition holding that while amplification or elaboration of existing grounds may be permitted by way of amendment but bringing on record new grounds, which do not have foundational basis in the existing petition, was not permissible and the test to be applied is whether the proposed grounds would necessitate the filing of a fresh application for seeking setting aside of the award. SECTION 36 In Steel Authority of India Ltd., India v Tata Projects Ltd., India & Anr High Court of Delhi while dealing the plea of the Petitioner that in light of the economic impact of Covid 19 Pandemic, deposit of awarded amount as pre-condition of stay of execution be waived in lieu of furnishing bank guarantee. The High Court held that economic impact of Covid 19 cannot be ignored but the same would have impacted both parties and Respondent can also not be deprived of the money in the prevailing situation and thus directed 50% of the awarded amount to be deposited in Court and bank guarantee be furnished of the balance 50%. In Starcon India Ltd & Anr. v Prasar Bharti High Court of Delhi recognised and applied the principle of severability and allowed enforcement of the part of the arbitral award which had not been set aside in S. 34 proceedings. SECTION 39 In M/s. Janapriya Engineerss Syndicate P. Ltd. v Union of India High Court of Delhi held that an application under S. 39(2) will only be maintainable when the Award is made, but not delivered to the parties as a party has not paid the fees demanded by the arbitrator. The Court held that there is a purpose for delivery of the Award as the delivery of Award shall entitle a party to either challenge the Award or seek execution of the same. It is in such a situation a party can invoke the provision of S. 39(2) of the Act. In the facts of the case, the Court held that as the Award had not yet been made, the petition was premature and consequently not maintainable. Section 47 & 48 In M/s. Centrotrade Minerals and Metals Inc. v Hindustan Copper Ltd., Supreme Court of India held that the word “otherwise” occurring in S. 48 (1) (b) of the Act being susceptible to two meanings, the narrower meaning has been preferred, which is in consonance with the pro-enforcement bias with respect to awards. On the facts of the case, it was held that it was not a case where party has been unable to present its case before the Arbitrator and ample opportunity was given by the Arbitrator to the party to present its case. In Glencore International AG v Hindustan Zinc Limited High Court of Delhi while deciding which Court would have territorial jurisdiction to entertain a petition for enforcement of a foreign award, held that there is a distinction between subject matter of arbitration as envisaged in Section 2(1)(e) and subject matter of award as envisaged in Section 47. It held that a petition under Section 47 would be maintainable only where the properties/assets of the Judgment Debtor are located, which may or may not be the chosen place of the parties for subject matter of arbitration. On the facts of the case, it held that as the Judgment Debtor’s administrative office, albeit stated to be on lease, as also Bank accounts and certain moveables are located in Delhi, the petition filed in High Court of Delhi is maintainable and the pendency of a composite petition under Section 34 and 48 before High Court of Rajasthan would not be a ground to hold that the High Court of Delhi does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition for enforcement. In M/s. Angelique International Limited v Public Electricity Corporation & Ors. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi allowed the petition for enforcement of part of a foreign award and accepted the Decree Holder’s submission that though Judgment Debtor does not have any assets within the jurisdiction of the High Court, as the enforcement is only sought qua the bank guarantees which were issued on the basis of counter guarantees issued by the concerned bank in Delhi, the petition filed in High Court of Delhi would be maintainable. Read : Arbitration Court Reckoner [May 2020](Kanika Singh is a Delhi-based lawyer, and may be reached at [email protected])  A.P. No. 191 /2020 decided on 18th June 2020  OMP (I) (COMM) 120/2020 decided on 9th June 2020  Arb P. 43/2018 decided on 5th June 2020  OMP(I) (COMM.) 218/2019 decided on 03rd June 2020  OMP(I) COMM No. 340/2019 decided on 4th June 2020  OMP(I) (COMM )254/2019 decided on 12th June 2020  OMP(I) (COMM) 35/2020 decided on 10th June 2020  OMP(I)(COMM) 117/2020 decided on 18th June 2020  OMP(I)(COMM) 121/2020 decided on 29th June 2020  Arb P. 203/2020 decided on 29th June 2020  Arb. P. 10/2019 decided on 2nd June 2020  2019SCCOnline SC1517  Civil Revision No. 7191/2019 (O & M) decided on 3rd June 2020  AIR2017SC3889  OMP(T) (COMM.) 24/2020 decided on 03rd June 2020  OMP(COMM) 444/2019 decided on 4th June 2020  OMP(COMM) 26/2019 decided on 4th June 2020  OMP(COMM) 363/2019 decided on 17th June 2020  OMP(COMM) 23/2020 decided on 17th June 2020  OMP(COMM) 430/2020 decided on12th June 2020  OMP (COMM.) 370/2017 decided on 8th June 2020  Commercial Arbitration Petition no. 557/2018 decided on 16th June 2020  OMP 680/2011 (New No. O.M.P. (COMM)392/2020) decided on 23rd June 2020  G.A. 394/2020 in A.P. 684/2017 – order dated 11th June 2020  OMP(COMM) 418/2020 – order dated 01st June 2020  OMP(ENF)(COMM) 232/2018 decided on 15th June 2020  OMP (MISC.) (COMM.) 377/2019 decided on 05th June 2020  Civil Appeal No. 2562/2006 decided on 02nd June 2020  OMP(EFA)(COMM.) 9/2019 decided on 8th June 2020  OMP(EFA)(COMM)8/2019 decided on 23rd June 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
narvikk/iStockBy WILLIAM MANSELL, ABC News(NEW YORK) — A pandemic of the novel coronavirus has now killed more than one million people worldwide.Over 34.2 million people across the globe have been diagnosed with COVID-19, the disease caused by the new respiratory virus, according to data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. The criteria for diagnosis — through clinical means or a lab test — has varied from country-to-country. Still, the actual numbers are believed to be much higher due to testing shortages, many unreported cases and suspicions that some national governments are hiding or downplaying the scope of their outbreaks.Since the first cases were detected in China in December, the virus has rapidly spread to every continent except Antarctica.The United States is the worst-affected country, with more than 7.2 million diagnosed cases and at least 207,789 deaths.California has the most cases of any U.S. state, with more than 822,000 people diagnosed, according to Johns Hopkins data. California is followed by Texas and Florida, with over 776,000 cases and over 709,000 cases, respectively.Nearly 190 vaccine candidates for COVID-19 are being tracked by the World Health Organization, at least nine of which are in crucial phase three trials.Here is how the news is developing Friday. All times Eastern:Oct 02, 4:46 amHouse passes symbolic COVID-19 stimulus billThe House passed a $2.2 trillion coronavirus stimulus relief bill late Thursday night, with a close 214-207 vote.In some last-minute drama, 18 Democrats voted no on the bill. Many who were against the bill are moderates who are very unhappy with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and leadership for staging what they call a “show” vote on a bill that will never become law.The Republican-led Senate is not expected to take up the measure.The House bill is largely symbolic and puts on the record what Democrats have been calling for for months: economic relief for those impacted by the pandemic.The bill would restore the $600 federal unemployment benefits that expired in July and would include another round of direct checks to Americans at $1,200 per taxpayer and $500 per dependent.It would also extend the Paycheck Protection Program to help small businesses, a benefit that expired in early August.A bipartisan COVID-19 relief bill is still possible. Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin are still having discussions. Pelosi announced late Thursday that she and Mnuchin have exchanged paper and are still deep in negotiations.“We made a lot of progress over the last few days, we still don’t have an agreement, but we have more work to do. And we’re going to see where we end up,” Mnuchin told reporters Wednesday.Copyright © 2020, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.,narvikk/iStockBy WILLIAM MANSELL, ABC News(NEW YORK) — A pandemic of the novel coronavirus has now killed more than one million people worldwide.Over 34.2 million people across the globe have been diagnosed with COVID-19, the disease caused by the new respiratory virus, according to data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. The criteria for diagnosis — through clinical means or a lab test — has varied from country-to-country. Still, the actual numbers are believed to be much higher due to testing shortages, many unreported cases and suspicions that some national governments are hiding or downplaying the scope of their outbreaks.Since the first cases were detected in China in December, the virus has rapidly spread to every continent except Antarctica.The United States is the worst-affected country, with more than 7.2 million diagnosed cases and at least 207,789 deaths.California has the most cases of any U.S. state, with more than 822,000 people diagnosed, according to Johns Hopkins data. California is followed by Texas and Florida, with over 776,000 cases and over 709,000 cases, respectively.Nearly 190 vaccine candidates for COVID-19 are being tracked by the World Health Organization, at least nine of which are in crucial phase three trials.Here is how the news is developing Friday. All times Eastern:Oct 02, 4:46 amHouse passes symbolic COVID-19 stimulus billThe House passed a $2.2 trillion coronavirus stimulus relief bill late Thursday night, with a close 214-207 vote.In some last-minute drama, 18 Democrats voted no on the bill. Many who were against the bill are moderates who are very unhappy with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and leadership for staging what they call a “show” vote on a bill that will never become law.The Republican-led Senate is not expected to take up the measure.The House bill is largely symbolic and puts on the record what Democrats have been calling for for months: economic relief for those impacted by the pandemic.The bill would restore the $600 federal unemployment benefits that expired in July and would include another round of direct checks to Americans at $1,200 per taxpayer and $500 per dependent.It would also extend the Paycheck Protection Program to help small businesses, a benefit that expired in early August.A bipartisan COVID-19 relief bill is still possible. Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin are still having discussions. Pelosi announced late Thursday that she and Mnuchin have exchanged paper and are still deep in negotiations.“We made a lot of progress over the last few days, we still don’t have an agreement, but we have more work to do. And we’re going to see where we end up,” Mnuchin told reporters Wednesday.Copyright © 2020, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
Over recent years, substorm chorus events (SCEs) have been proposed as a useful indicator of substorm onset. The events are regularly seen in the data from the VELOX (VLF/ELF Logger Experiment) instrument at Halley, Antarctica, which has provided over a decade of near continuous observations. SCEs are generally thought to be excited by the injection of electrons near midnight as they gradient-curvature drift toward dawn. On close one-to-one inspection of SCEs seen at Halley and energetic electron signatures seen with the LANL geostationary spacecraft, we have found that many events are associated with the drift echo of the injected electrons rather than the initial injection. In this paper we present some example events as well as the relative statistics. We find that approximately 1/4 of SCEs where a clear signature can be seen in the LANL data are associated with drift echoes rather than the initial substorm injection. We argue that rather than being a direct signature of substorm onset, SCEs are a signature of enhanced electron fluxes in the chorus generation region, which are often, but not exclusively, associated with substorm injections.
Is having a P-Card an essential function of this position?No Posting NumberF0798P Preferred Knowledge, Skills, Abilities and/or Competencies A history of teaching microanatomy will be seen as a benefit but isnot essential. All candidates must possess a DVM, a Ph.D. in Biology or a relatedfield, or an equivalent degree. The ranks of lecturer (non-tenuretrack) and assistant professor (tenure track) are for candidateswho have recently completed their doctoral degree. The ranks ofassociate and full professor (tenure track or tenured) are forcandidates who have achieved that rank at peer institutions or whomeet the requirements to be appointed at that level. For more onthe requirements for the rank of lecturer, please see the UGAGuidelines for the Appointment and Promotion of Lecturers(https://provost.uga.edu/policies/appointment-promotion-and-tenure/guidelines-for-appointment-and-promotion-of-lecturers/).For more on the requirements for the ranks of assistant, associate,or full professor, please see the UGA Guidelines for Appointment,Promotion and Tenure(https://provost.uga.edu/faculty-affairs/UGA_Guidelines_for_APT_approved_2_2020.pdf). Employment TypeEmployee Anticipated Start Date04/01/2021 Terminal degree appropriate for the discipline College/Unit/Department websitewww.vet.uga Does this position have operation, access, or control offinancial resources?No Position Details Job Closing Date The University of Georgia – College of Veterinary Medicine invitesapplications for a knowledgeable and experienced veterinaryanatomist, at the lecturer, assistant professor, associateprofessor or full professor level. Responsibilities will includedidactic teaching and service activities. Faculty will be expectedto develop their own collaborative research program or contributeto ongoing research of other faculty. The University of Georgia ( UGA ), a land-grant and sea-grantuniversity with statewide commitments and responsibilities is thestate’s oldest, most comprehensive, and most diversifiedinstitution of higher education ( http://www.uga.edu/ ). UGA is currentlyranked among the top 20 public universities in U.S. News &World Report. The University’s main campus is located in Athens,approximately 65 miles northeast of Atlanta, with extended campusesin Atlanta, Griffin, Gwinnett, and Tifton. UGA was founded in 1785by the Georgia General Assembly as the first state-charteredUniversity in the country. UGA employs approximately 1,800full-time instructional faculty and more than 7,600 full-timestaff. The University’s enrollment exceeds 36,000 studentsincluding over 27,500 undergraduates and over 8,500 graduate andprofessional students. Academic programs reside in 17 schools andcolleges, as well as a medical partnership with Augusta Universityhoused on the UGA Health Sciences Campus in Athens. Retirement Plan Contract TypeFiscal (12 mo.) Special Instructions to Applicants Job Posting Date01/13/2021 Open until filledYes Physical Demands Is driving a responsibility of this position?No Faculty RankOpen Rank Does this position have direct interaction or care of childrenunder the age of 18 or direct patient care?No Working TitleVeterinary Anatomist Review of applications will begin immediately and will continueuntil the position is filled. All applications received by February18, 2021 are assured full consideration. The target for fillingthis position is spring to early summer, 2021. Please be aware thatdual career hire arrangements are not available for thisposition Underutilization About the College/Unit/Department Advertised SalaryWe offer a competitive salary, commensurate with qualificationsand experience. Position Summary Benefits EligibilityBenefits Eligible Posting TypeExternal Minimum Qualifications Is this a Position of Trust?Yes Effective End Date (for Limited-Term postings) Tenure StatusNegotiable Does this position require a P-Card?No The University of Georgia is an Equal Opportunity/AffirmativeAction employer. All qualified applicants will receiveconsideration for employment without regard to race, color,religion, sex, national origin, ethnicity, age, geneticinformation, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation orprotected veteran status. Persons needing accommodations orassistance with the accessibility of materials related to thissearch are encouraged to contact Central HR ([email protected]). Classification TitleOpen Rank Relevant/Preferred Education, Experience, Licensure, and/orCertification EEO Statement DepartmentVet Med Biosciences & Diagnostic Imag About the University of Georgia Be advised a credit check will be required for all positions withfinancial responsibilities. For additional information about thecredit check criteria, visit the UGA Credit Background Check website. Posting Details FLSA Additional Requirements The University of Georgia College of Veterinary Medicine, foundedin 1946, is dedicated to training future veterinarians, providingservices to animal owners and veterinarians, and conductinginvestigations to improve the health of animals as well as people.The college benefits pets and their owners, food-producing animals,and wildlife by offering the highest quality hospital anddiagnostic laboratory services. Equipped with the mosttechnologically advanced facilities located on a university campus,the college is dedicated to safeguarding public health by studyingemerging infectious diseases that affect both animal and humanhealth.The College of Veterinary Medicine values all members of theuniversity community, recognizing that differences in experienceand culture can only lead to a more well-rounded, acceptingacademic environment. We have an expectation that all employeeswill demonstrate a contribution to diversity and inclusion asembodied in our Principles of Community ( http://vet.uga.edu/principles-of-community/) Location of VacancyAthens Area To be eligible for tenure upon appointment, candidates must beappointed as an associate or full professor, have been tenured at aprior institution, and bring a demonstrably national reputation tothe institution. Candidates must be approved for tenure uponappointment before hire. Does this position have Security Access (e.g., public safety,IT security, personnel records, patient records, or access tochemicals and medications)Yes Credit and P-Card policy Duties/ResponsibilitiesPosting Specific QuestionsRequired fields are indicated with an asterisk (*).Applicant DocumentsRequired DocumentsResume/CVCover LetterOptional Documents
The full traffic signal at 18th Street and Wesley Avenue in Ocean City would be set to flashing mode between Nov. 1 and March 15 each year, if City Council passes an ordinance approving the recommendation.City Council on Thursday unanimously approved the first reading of an ordinance that would set two traffic signals on flash mode between Nov. 1 and March 15. The signals are at 18th Street and Wesley Avenue; and 34th Street and Central Avenue.A second reading of the ordinance is scheduled for March 26.The red flashing signals would face the cross-streets (18th Street and 34th Street) and the yellow signals would face the through traffic on Central and Wesley avenues.Signals on county roads have been set on flash mode for the winter since 2011 at the following intersections:24th Street and Bay Avenue40th Street and West Avenue46th Street and West Avenue52nd Street and West AvenueThe new recommendation is based on “substantially reduced traffic volume during the off-season,” according to the Ocean City Police Department._____Sign up for free breaking news updates from Ocean City.Get Ocean City updates in your Facebook news feed. “Like” us._____
First showing for Mono.For the first time this year, Aga Bakery (stand G200) will show equipment from Mono and European manufacturers such as Bongard, Pavallier and Esmach.New for the exhibition is the Mono V3 bread plant, the latest version of the Genesis fully-automatic bread and roll plant, the Williams retarder prover and the Fermentolevain from Pavallier. The stand will also have a working booth of Bakon equipment, a working roll plant from Bachtech and a range of slicers from JAC. Aga supplies equipment for bake-off operations to high-volume, automated lines.
The Kemper Twin Star, available from Eurobake (Bolton) is a tow row, fully-automatic dough dividing and moulding machine, which produces round, long moulded and folded rolls to handmade quality. The machine can produce between 1,600 and 3,000 pieces an hour. Available in table or stand-mounted and wheeled versions, the Twin Star has a compact head and is easy to place close to other equipment. Its moul-ding belt can be extended to 80cm, which can be helpful when depositing manually; the belt can be tilted out of the way when production is paused. The machine can be incorporated into a full roll line with provers, long moulding stations and discharge belts to create a totally automatic roll line.