The DPR was nominally founded by the Donetsk Republic separatist organization, which was banned by Ukraine in On 7 April , a group of rebel. , e dell'art. 3 del decreto legislativo 5 aprile , n. La domanda di . 16 del D.P.R. 30 giugno , n. , o comunque previsti da. Table Trends in Simple Average Tariffs, . (DPR) describes and evaluates GoP's policies in the six critical areas that form the core of this 1, Fuel oil (fob).
|Published:||24 March 2014|
|PDF File Size:||23.84 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.51 Mb|
In these countries several demonstrations and protests has been held by anti-fascists to show support for Donbass. The DPR international militia volunteers from western Europe are mostly Spanish and Italian communists but also groups of Israeli feminists whose open statement is to "fight fascism" has also travelled to the DPR and joined the militia groups.
From April to July the unrecognized republic controlled most of Ukraine's Donetsk Oblast stretching from the city of Mariupol in the south on the Azov Sea north to Sviatohirsk and Sloviansk near the border with Kharkiv Oblast.
In re McDaniels, 86 B. Ohio appointment ; In re McDonald Bros. The standard for reviewing d p r 238 99 bankruptcy judge's decisions in core proceedings is considerably more deferential than the one applicable to decisions in non-core proceedings.
In non-core proceedings bankruptcy judges are limited to submitting "proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the district judge, and any final order or judgment shall be entered by the district judge after considering the bankruptcy judge's proposed d p r 238 99 and conclusions and after reviewing de novo those matters to which any party has timely and specifically objected.
Bankruptcy decisions in non-core proceedings are not subject to Section 's provisions, and they are due little, if any, deference from the reviewing district courts. In contrast, a bankruptcy judge's authority is broader in core proceedings.
U.S. General Imports: Schedule A commodity by country - Google Books
Subsection b 1 provides that "[b]ankruptcy judges may hear and determine all cases under title 11 and all core proceedings arising under title 11, or arising in a case under title 11, referred under subsection a of this section, and may enter appropriate orders and judgments, subject to review under section d p r 238 99 this title.
Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the bankruptcy court to judge the credibility d p r 238 99 the witnesses.
In comparison, a bankruptcy court's conclusions of law are reviewable de novo, by analogy to "the familiar standards of review normally employed in appeals to the courts of appeals in civil cases generally.
Discretionary decisions are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. In re Gonic, F.
There is no abuse of d p r 238 99 when the bankruptcy judge acts in reliance of a mistaken conclusion of law or a clearly erroneous finding of fact, as long as there are sufficient other grounds for making the same decision.
T I Federal Credit Union v.
Decreto Presidente Repubblica 11 luglio , n.
A reviewing court may affirm the appealed judgment on any basis presented by the record. If he perceives a materially adverse interest, he has at his disposal an armamentarium of permissible remedies A bankruptcy court's judgment call approving fees is entitled to that same deference.
Note, however, that "[t]he d p r 238 99 of section is to compensate attorneys serving in bankruptcy cases at rates comparable to those earned by attorneys performing similar services outside of Title 11 and thus expressly overrule the notions of conservation of the estate and economy of administration which were applicable under d p r 238 99 Bankruptcy Act.
In short, a parsimonious spirit should be foreign to fee determinations. Even though this term is not defined in the statute, a close reading of subsection a 4 A sheds light on it.
Donetsk People's Republic
A service is not "necessary" if it is: Thus, by negative implication, a bankruptcy judge may award compensation for services that were: Defense of Criminal Case The Bank challenges the bankruptcy court's award of compensation to counsel for services rendered in defending the criminal case.
As explained repeatedly to the bankruptcy judge, a conviction would give the PR-DOJ at most a monetary claim; the forfeiture of the debtor's charter would not prevent a successful reorganization; and forcing the trustee to d p r 238 99 a criminal trial would produce unnecessary expenses to the estate for little or no benefit to creditors," because "a conviction Specifically, the court wrote that A short answer d p r 238 99 this objection is that we refused to allow counsel to resign because it disrupted [the] criminal trial: We also hold that benefit to creditors is not only measured in terms of a monetary dividend received as a result of the Trustee's administration of the estate.
Benefit has a wider connotation.
In this case, the benefit includes d p r 238 99 with the State's attempt to offer the accused a speedy and fair trial and to enforce the law. Opinion and Order, at 7. We agree with the Bank that the court's concept of "benefit to the estate" is inconsistent with federal bankruptcy policy. Whether or not the bankruptcy court may award attorneys' fees for the criminal defense of the debtor depends on whether the defense benefited the estate, primarily by protecting its assets.
In determining whether the best interests are at stake, there must be an actual need for the services, based upon a threat to the estate or its property. The threat must be actual and real, not some hypothetical or speculative benefit which may or may not be realized.
d p r 238 99