Appeared before Canada's Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal on administrative and security intelligence matters

Canada Federal Court of Appeal (Heald, Mahoney and Stone JJ.

On 19 February 1999, the Federal Court dismissed the appeal.

The decision of the Trial Division of the Federal Court may be appealed against before the Federal Court of Appeal.

On 16 August 2001, the Full Federal Court dismissed an appeal against the Federal Court's decision.

The Federal Court of Appeal ruling may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Case 587 Canada Federal Court of Appeal (Heald, Mahoney and Stone JJ. A.

On 7 March 2001, the Federal Court dismissed an appeal against the decision of RRT.

2.5 On 3 October 2001, the author requested leave to appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court but it was denied on 21 February 2002.

Nor did he pursue an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court from the decision of the Full Federal Court concerning the second RRT decision.

On 28 February 2002, the complainant withdrew an application to the High Court for leave to appeal the Full Federal Court's decision.

This decision can in turn be appealed before the Federal Court of Appeal if the lower court judge certifies that a serious question of general importance is involved and states that question.

Case 587 Canada Federal Court of Appeal (Heald, Mahoney and Stone JJ. A. ) Compania Maritima Villa Nova S.A. v. Northern Sales Co. (20 November 1991)

The Federal Court of Appeal concluded that the applicant had been subjected to differential treatment on the basis that she was Indian and worked on a reserve.

Singapore Singapore Court of Appeal

The Court dismissed the appeal.

2.7 On 28 June 1999, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

On appeal, the Frankfurt Court of Appeal quashed that decision and referred the matter back to the Frankfurt Regional Court.

The Court of Appeal of Quebec rejected the appeal against the conviction and the Supreme Court of Canada refused the application for leave to appeal against this decision.

Conducted wide range of prosecutions on behalf of the federal Crown, including on narcotic trafficking, tax evasion and anti trust cases, and appeared as appellate Counsel before the Manitoba Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada

President of the Appeal Penal Court Damascus

On 6 October 2000, upon appeal, the Borgarting Court of Appeal upheld this decision.

The authors could take a civil action for damages against the State in a District Court at first instance, if necessary, on appeal in the Court of Appeal, and subject to leave to appeal in the Supreme Court.

He appealed to the High Court and subsequently to the Court of Appeal.

The legal system comprises a Court of Appeal, a Supreme Court and a Magistrate's Court, with a final appeal procedure lying open to the Privy Council of the United Kingdom.

On 19 November 1999, the Supreme Court rejected the author's application and on 24 December 1999, rejected his appeal from the Court of Appeal.

She appealed to the Paris Court of Appeal.

1990 1993 Judge, Gulating Lagmannsrett (appeal court), Bergen

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court dismissed the authors' appeal.

The Tunis court of appeal upheld that judgement.

The Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal.

Yet the Court of Cassation found that that ground had been discussed in the Appeal Court.

The Supreme Court of Canada has granted leave to appeal.

Canada Quebec Court of Appeal (Vallerand, Rothaman and Mailhot JJ.A.

Canada Alberta Court of Appeal (Kerans, Hetherington, and Irving JJ.

The author appealed to the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

On 19 June 1989, the Constitutional Court dismissed the appeal.

Case 587 MAL 34 (2) (a) (iii) 35 (1) 36 (1) (a) (iii) Canada Federal Court of Appeal (Heald, Mahoney and Stone JJ. ) Compania Maritima Villa Nova S.A. v. Northern Sales Co. (20 November 1991)

Case 587 MAL 34 (2) (a) (iii) 35 (1) 36 (1) (a) (iii) Canada Federal Court of Appeal (Heald, Mahoney and Stone JJ. ) Compania Maritima Villa Nova S.A. v. Northern Sales Co. (20 November 1991)

The Committee declared the complaint admissible, even though the complainant had not applied to the Federal Court for leave to appeal the Minister's decision not to grant a stay of his removal on humanitarian grounds.

The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal and the Chief Justice confirmed the death sentence on 30 January 1997.

The Committee observes that, in respect of the first RRT decision which concentrated on his credibility, the complainant pursued no appeal to the Federal Court and has offered no explanation for his failure to do so.

The author's appeal to the Supreme Court was declared inadmissible on 26 September 1996, and an appeal to the Constitutional Court was dismissed on procedural grounds on 7 October 1998.

Application for leave to appeal was denied by the Supreme Court.

The results of the appeal to the Supreme Court are pending.