Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Retraction of statements - onus to prove - the persons concerned have accepted the modus operandi to the knowledge of which, they alone are privy of. Retraction is an understandable after thought employed by the persons to wiggle them out of the legal tangle. - We find that retraction, if any, would have had some face value if they could establish licit procurement of the impugned goods. In the absence of the same retraction has no meaning. - AT
Retraction of statements - onus to prove - the persons concerned have accepted the modus operandi to the knowledge of which, they alone are privy of. Retraction is an understandable after thought employed by the persons to wiggle them out of the legal tangle. - We find that retraction, if any, would have had some face value if they could establish licit procurement of the impugned goods. In the absence of the same retraction has no meaning. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
