The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Daily Archives: June 20, 2021
Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Is Thriving Worldwide with Aura Wellness, Intouch Clinic, Landmark Fitness Clark…
Posted: June 20, 2021 at 1:07 am
The latest analysis released by HTF MI on Global Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Outlook 2020 Survey results sheds light on how investment and competitive landscape is impacted due to significant changes in the Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Industry. The research coverage includes analysis on companies such as Arab Yoga Foundation (AYF), Soul Warrior, Sukoun, Aura Wellness, Intouch Clinic, Landmark Fitness Ltd., Osana Family Wellness, Cairo Osteopathy, Blue Tree Clinics, House of Nature Medical Center, Zen Yoga, Salmiya SKY Meditation Centre & Jordan Chiropractic & Acupuncture etc. It is expected that the healthcare and life sciences industry will likely continue to be an attractive target market showing noteworthy sign to Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine for the foreseeable future.
Get one step closer to market leaders and emerging players of Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market.Get Sample Pages for Quick Illustration @:https://www.htfmarketreport.com/sample-report/3125109-global-integrative-health-or-complementary-and-alternative-medicine-market-growth
Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Companies are expanding their roles to deliver value beyond the services or offerings by helping clinics and hospitals authority report on quality, offering services that engage patients in real time, improving safety, regulatory compliance and physician performance.
According to Sources, national healthcare spending is projected to grow at an average of 5.5% annually. Lot of Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Companies expect that health cares evolution will have far-reaching impacts as upcoming business models emerge that blur boundaries and drive cross-sector and cross-industry convergence. With this edition, HTF MI have come up with a scope that actually delivers answer to current and future scenario.
Make an Enquiry for Global Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Study @https://www.htfmarketreport.com/enquiry-before-buy/3125109-global-integrative-health-or-complementary-and-alternative-medicine-market-growth
The titled segments and sub-section of the Global Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine market are illuminated below:
The Global Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine market has been divided into, application, type, technology and region/country.
On The Basis Of Type, Market is segmented by , Segmentation by type: breakdown data from 2016 to 2021 in Section 2.3; and forecast to 2026 in section 10.7., Traditional Alternative Medicine & Botanicals, Mind Healing, Body Healing & Sensory Healing, by Application/End Users it includes Cardiovascular Diseases (CVDs), Obesity, Diabetes, Infertility & Others
Geographically, the Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Study provides Revenue Sizing as
North America: USA, Canada and MexicoEurope: Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Russia , Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Austria, Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands and Rest of EuropeAsia-Pacific: China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, India, Southeast Asia and OthersSouth America: Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, OthersMEA: Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Turkey, Israel, Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa & Rest of MEA
Additionally the connected stakeholders of Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine such as distributors, suppliers, health care providers, governments, other payers, patients, and other stakeholders were also considered in the survey to derive Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine market estimation and demand side analysis.- To better explore trend and current state to deliver closer view towards changing market dynamics of Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market.
Buy Latest Edition of Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Research @https://www.htfmarketreport.com/buy-now?format=1&report=3125109
Some Frequency Asked Questions
1) How can we add or get new players profile as per our need?
Yes, we can add or profile new company as per client need in the report. Final confirmation to be provided by research team depending upon the difficulty of survey. The Standard version of the report currently profiles players such as Arab Yoga Foundation (AYF), Soul Warrior, Sukoun, Aura Wellness, Intouch Clinic, Landmark Fitness Ltd., Osana Family Wellness, Cairo Osteopathy, Blue Tree Clinics, House of Nature Medical Center, Zen Yoga, Salmiya SKY Meditation Centre & Jordan Chiropractic & Acupuncture.
** Data availability will be confirmed by research in case of privately held company. Up to 3 players can be added at no added cost.
2) Can we have different set of Segmentation added or further granularity in existing segmentation is possible?Yes, inclusion of additional segmentation in Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Study is possible subject to data availability and difficulty of survey. Also, granularity can be checked contacting sales team as customization are subject to final approval and feasibility check by research team.
3) What years are considered in Global Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market study; When it was last released?Historical year 2016-2020Base year 2020Forecast period** 2021 to 2026 [** forecast year can be customized]Version of Study: 2021 Published
browse complete report and table of contents @https://www.htfmarketreport.com/reports/3125109-global-integrative-health-or-complementary-and-alternative-medicine-market-growth
Read the rest here:
Posted in Alternative Medicine
Comments Off on Integrative Health or Complementary and Alternative Medicine Market Is Thriving Worldwide with Aura Wellness, Intouch Clinic, Landmark Fitness Clark…
Yoga, a healthy activity for over 5000 years – Omniscience
Posted: at 1:07 am
Nearly 300 thousand people practice yoga around the world. For their health, for relaxation, and for outdoor activity, the reasons for this practice are numerous. Studies show the physiological and psychological benefits of such an activity.
What does a chair, a mountain and a warrior have in common?
If you are a meditation enthusiast, youd know immediately that they are different yoga postures. Silence, concentration and spiritual elevation, yoga is synonymous with well-being, but not only. It is also recognized for its therapeutic virtues, and allows to establish a relationship between the body and the spirit. It is often used to combat stress, both individually and by doctors, who may suggest yoga sessions when more conventional therapies do not work.
But is yoga really effective in medicine?
A study published in the Journal of Clinical Neuroscience attempted to answer this question. Drs. Mooventhan and Nivethitha of the Department of Research and Development, S-VYASA University in India analyzed publications on yoga. By sorting through scientific and non-scientific papers and targeting terms such as "randomized controlled trials", they sought to determine whether the scientific method could be used to affirm the value of yoga in medicine. They reported their findings in their publication "Evidence based effects of yoga in neurological disorders".
Stroke, Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis are very common diseases in the world. All three of them cause numerous effects that are difficult to manage in daily life: fatigue, pain, balance problems, depression, anxiety, etc. To date, there is no treatment to effectively stop these diseases, and the side effects of medications that can slow them down can be numerous.
In studies, yoga has already proven itself. It seems to provide physical and mental relief to patients. It reduces fatigue, anxiety and depression, and improves body awareness, balance, flexibility and muscle strength. It also helps to reduce incontinence, which sometimes occurs with multiple sclerosis.
"In Turkey, yoga is often used in addition to standard treatments for migraines.
Yoga is also useful for patients with epileptic seizures. The medications that control these seizures have many side effects, so treatments that reduce the number of these medications are of interest. 44% of patients with epilepsy use some form of alternative medicine, and the practice of yoga seems to reduce the number of perceived seizures and thus improves the quality of life of patients. Finally, in cases of Alzheimer's or dementia, yoga can be useful in managing the stress generated by these diseases, both for patients and their families.
However,certain undesirable effects are not unheard of. For sick people, sometimes physically fragile, positions and a too sustained practice of yoga can be harmful. Some vision problems, occlusions or lesions can be caused by unusual postures or positions that are too difficult.
In short, yoga has been proven to improve the quality of life. It does not replace conventional treatments, but is an effective addition to reduce certain symptoms. Thus, even if yoga is not THE answer to diseases, because it does not allow to heal the patients durably, it has all the same a great utility, in the management of the stress, the anxiety. Do not deprive yourself of it, do yoga!
References :
Mooventhan, A., and L. Nivethitha. "Evidence based effects of yoga in neurological disorders." Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 43 (2017): 61-67.
The rest is here:
Posted in Alternative Medicine
Comments Off on Yoga, a healthy activity for over 5000 years – Omniscience
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Based on relationship | Solve issues together – Arkansas Online
Posted: at 1:07 am
Based on relationship
Last month, I suggested that personal identity has shifted from relationship-based to market-based notions of success and that this shift contributes significantly to our political strife. Today I suggest that this shift has been driven by the political right.
Libertarianism with its emphasis on extreme personal freedom and rugged individualism within the marketplace--raw capitalism, let's call it--has taken over the GOP. This value system leads many to feel undervalued or left out. The schism within the GOP between libertarian/capitalist values and traditional conservatism with its focus on family and community relationships has led directly to Trumpism, which attempts to fill the void by emphasizing class or race as a basis for identity.
Democratic ideals have changed little from those well-articulated by Mario Cuomo in the mid-1990s when he likened society to an extended family stating that we should provide for the education, clothing, feeding, health care and housing of members of our family. One can argue about whether large-scale social programs are effective, but few would argue with the principle of helping others. We used to agree on helping each other and differ on the means to achieve this.
Our biggest threat is not socialism, but elevation of libertarian capitalism to a moral rather than an economic system. This criticism is not anti-capitalist because capitalism thrives best in a society based on traditional moral values of caring.
Religion is not the remedy because those parts of the country with the highest degree of religiosity are those with the highest rate of "deaths of despair": suicide, and deaths from substance abuse, specifically more rural areas. Let's all recommit to relationships and social responsibility as the bedrock of society. These values transcend party.
KATHY CURTIN
Fayetteville
Solve issues together
It seems Republicans have always been opposed to entitlements, yet our governor has stopped the added monthly unemployment benefits to those who need it the most. All in an effort to force people to go back to work for starvation wages so someone can own a hamburger stand, all this when maybe only 30 percent of the people are fully vaccinated.
This is on the governor. This is the very definition of entitlement. What about helping with child care, which is almost impossible to find, or help with transportation, health care, etc.? Work with small-business owners and potential employees. Let's solve these issues together. What would it hurt? I was in the staffing business for 30 years and it's just not this hard.
J.E. JACKSON
Hot Springs Village
See the rest here:
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Based on relationship | Solve issues together - Arkansas Online
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Based on relationship | Solve issues together – Arkansas Online
How the Houses Silicon Valley smackdown is dividing conservatives – POLITICO
Posted: at 1:07 am
Getting down to the specifics of these bills, they range from bad to ugly, said Patrick Hedger, vice president of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, which is funded in part by groups connected to the Kochs. Americans for Prosperity, a Koch group, called the antitrust package a jumble of legislative proposals [that] targets American companies [and] treats them as guilty until proven innocent.
The critics are arguing, in part, that the bills are antithetical to GOP values, which traditionally emphasize the free market and oppose regulatory intervention.
These bills represent a huge intervention into the U.S. economy, said Jessica Melugin, director of the Competitive Enterprise Institutes Center for Technology and Innovation, which has received tens of thousands of dollars from Koch foundations in recent years as well as funding from the major tech companies. This is not on-brand for Republicans.
The Houses top Republican, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, weighed in against the legislation on Wednesday, saying it only gives Democrats in the federal government more power to tip the scales. McCarthy, a California lawmaker, has received tens of thousands of dollars from Google, Amazon and Facebook, as well as the Koch Industries PAC, in recent years.
But traditional Republican aversion to meddling in big business saw serious erosion under Trump, whose Justice Department filed a major antitrust suit against Google. The antitrust bills right-leaning supporters say the Koch groups are simply out of touch with a populist GOP base that feels censored and silenced by the tech giants.
The Koch group and all of these pro-big tech people on the right, they do have an advantage, which is inertia, said Jon Schweppe, the director of policy and government affairs at the populist American Principles Project, which has received money from the Mercer family. The Republican Party for a long time has been a party opposed to any antitrust or concern about concentrated power. But the divide here is that the base definitely wants to break up Big Tech.
One sign of the anti-tech messages growing appeal among the GOP caucus: Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado, the top Republican on the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee, co-sponsored all five of the antitrust bills, along with North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn and Texas Rep. Lance Gooden.
Buck said he believes that the legislative efforts are an extension of his outreach to blue collar voters.
When I go back to my district, I hear a lot of people talk about the fact that what Big Tech doing is wrong, he said. They dont necessarily know they cheated this particular company in this way, but they have this gut feeling that these companies are too big and theyre cheating. So I do think that we will reach out to a broad spectrum [with these bills].
Democrats behind the legislation have welcomed the support from Republicans, seeking to ride the populist wave to garner lasting support for their agenda.
Ultimately, its a fight for the future of the Republican party Trump-style populism vs. traditional conservatism and the Koch network isnt going down without a fight. As soon as the bills were introduced last week, Koch-backed groups including Americans for Prosperity, the American Enterprise Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, the Open Competition Center, TechFreedom and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation came out with statements and campaigns condemning the legislation.
Aside from the tech companies themselves, the Koch groups and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have been some of the loudest voices blanketing Capitol Hill urging Republican lawmakers to oppose the legislation, according to two aides familiar with the conversations who asked to remain anonymous in order to discuss private conversations. (Many of the groups that receive Koch funding also receive money from Facebook, Google or Amazon.)
I dont think Koch is out on their own on this, said Zach Graves, head of policy at the Lincoln Network, a right-of-center tech advocacy group. I think they have a lot of alignment with relatively powerful industry groups not just tech, but also just general Chamber of Commerce types who dont want to see massive expansion of the antitrust regime and giving big new powers to the [Federal Trade Commission] and DOJ.
Each of the bills has at least one Republican co-sponsor, but the legislation will need more GOP support to push through the Senate. Thats left undecided Republicans in the middle of a tense debate.
For instance, the Heritage Foundation, which is building out its tech policy apparatus, has chosen to stay out of the public conversation for now as it weighs how to thread the needle between taking on Big Tech and maintaining a hands-off approach to government regulation.
As with any other meaningful policy debate, Heritage is carefully looking at the issues inherent to the Big Tech debate in order to come up with policy recommendations that address legitimate concerns about censorship and the growing influence of Big Tech platforms, said John Cooper, the Heritage Foundations associate director for institute communications. To argue that these are issues that dont require some sort of action is simply unrealistic at this point, though its important policymakers act in a way that doesnt give the federal government undue authority that Americans will regret giving to bureaucrats down the road.
Another crucial dynamic is the fact that the Koch network and the Chamber of Commerce, once two of the most important forces in the Republican Party, fell increasingly out of favor with GOP backers during the Trump era. The Koch network alienated a huge swath of formerly devoted Republican followers as its political arm expressed new openness last year to backing Democrats, and the Chamber drew fire for backing several Democrats as well.
The Koch network and Chamber crowd have zero influence right now, said one House Republican aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to speak candidly. Most of the House Judiciary members and their staff couldnt pick out their people from a police lineup.
But on the other side of the schism, many traditional conservatives and libertarians feel theyre defending the core of their party against Trumps influence. That includes growing GOP calls for a government crackdown on social media companies that they accuse of censoring conservatives, a theme that Trump pressed repeatedly during his time in the White House.
I reject the premise that this is the right is divided, said Berin Szoka, president of the tech- and Koch-funded think tank TechFreedom. People accusing tech companies of censorship, he added, are seeking to compel social media sites to host the most despicable people and content imaginable.
The Democratic-led bills H.R. 3816 (117), H.R. 3825 (117), H.R. 3826 (117), H.R. 3843 (117) and H.R. 3849 (117) dont include prominent anti-tech proposals that Trump and other Republicans had championed, such as stripping or reducing the online industrys protections against lawsuits over user-posted content. But anti-tech activists on the right have made it clear that they support the House antitrust bills in part to punish the major tech companies alleged censorship.
Conservatives are being canceled by Big Tech, we are being kicked off these platforms, we are being silenced and censored, said Mike Davis, founder and president of the right-wing Internet Accountability Project, which receives some funding from Oracle. Conservatives need to pick a side theyre either with everyday Americans or theyre with these Big Tech monopolists and their D.C. lobbyists.
Both sides agree that theres nowhere near as robust of an apparatus on the right for supporting antitrust changes. Whereas a swath of academics and groups on the left have taken up trust-busting as a priority policy area, only a few groups and figures are devoted to the issue on the right.
I think its going to take a new generation of folks, said the House Republican aide.
So far, most Republicans in Congress have not weighed in publicly on the legislation. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the pro-Trump ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee with a more libertarian bent, has been actively whipping against the bills, targeting their Democratic roots.
On the other side, lobbyists for News Corp. and fellow Murdoch-owned company Fox have been working Republican lawmakers to vote in favor, according to two people familiar with the dynamics. And the tech giants themselves some of the biggest lobbying spenders in Washington are caught in the middle.
There is going to continue to be a battle on this, and it parallels the realignment, Schweppe said. The Kochs have always been this more libertarian wing. I dont think thats the main thrust of the party anymore.
Read the original post:
How the Houses Silicon Valley smackdown is dividing conservatives - POLITICO
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on How the Houses Silicon Valley smackdown is dividing conservatives – POLITICO
Louis Marinelli: Is Europe’s interest in the 2014 Vrbetice Explosions driven by the Biden-Putin meeting? – PRNewswire
Posted: at 1:07 am
SACRAMENTO, Calif., June 17, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Louis Marinelli, an American political activistand California governor candidate, released a short filmexploring the issue of Vrbetice explosions in the light of the first Biden - Putin meeting.
The film was made in collaboration with Adam Kokesh, a libertarian activist who ran for USA presidency in 2020 and was aimed to present a perspective that is not widespread in the media today and discuss an alternative vision of the explosions in Czech Republic, sanctions against Russia and the current state of international relations prior to Putin - Biden meeting.
In 2014, a series of explosions destroyed an arms depot in the Czech Republic, causing two deaths. At the time, Czech authorities blamed the explosions on human error. But now, in the months leading up to the Biden-Putin meeting set for Geneva, the explosions have resurfaced as a topic of international concern - except now NATO allies and EU members are blaming Russia - and placing sanctions on Russia as a result, even though they lack any direct evidence of Russian involvement.
Louis Marinelli unravels the story and presents an alternative theory - is Europe's renewed interest in the 2014 explosions in Vrbetice really just a pretext to place sanctions on Russia and tarnish Russia's reputation before Putin's meeting with Biden? Or maybe the explosions are simply the result of a rivalry between two arms dealers - Emelian Gebrev, and Boyko Borissov, who, until recently, was also the Prime Minister of Bulgaria?
Additional information:
Louis J. Marinelli(born March 28, 1986) is an Americanpolitical activistof theCalifornia independencemovement organized under theYes CaliforniaIndependence Campaign, an umbrella organization representing the coalition of parties and organizations supporting the proposed California independence referendum. Marinelli is the former president of Yes California and the former interim chairman of theCalifornia National Party, under which he also ran forCalifornia State AssemblyinCalifornia's 80th State Assembly districtrepresenting southSan Diego,National City,Chula Vista,San Ysidro, and the surrounding communities.
Adam Charles Kokesh(born February 1, 1982) is anAmericanlibertarianpoliticalactivist, radio host, and author. Kokesh was a U.S.2020 Libertarian presidential candidaterunning on thesingle-issueplatform of an "orderly dissolution of thefederal government."
Kokesh is a formerU.S. Marine Corpssergeant, serving in theIraq Warin 2004. Upon his return from Iraq, he became ananti-waractivist and an advocate forIraq Veterans Against the War.
Media contact:Louis Marinelli[emailprotected]+79859426240
SOURCE Louis Marinelli
Read the rest here:
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on Louis Marinelli: Is Europe’s interest in the 2014 Vrbetice Explosions driven by the Biden-Putin meeting? – PRNewswire
Joe Biden’s meeting with Putin, vaccine passports, nightclub shootings, and other top columns – USA TODAY
Posted: at 1:07 am
USA TODAY Published 8:00 a.m. ET June 19, 2021
From Joe Biden's meeting with Putin, to a Pulse nightclub shooting, and vaccine passports, here are some of our top columns you may have missed.
In today's fast-paced news environment, it can be hard to keep up. For your weekend reading, we've startedin-case-you-missed-it compilations of some of the week's topUSA TODAY Opinionpieces.As always, thanks for reading, andfor your feedback.
USA TODAY Opinion editors
By Tom Nichols
"It all started in 2019, when in response to an open invitation from a user on Twitter to post ourmost controversial food takes, I decided to bypass all the hatred for mayonnaise and other foods, and to fire off a zinger about the cuisine of an entire subcontinent. 'Indian food,'I said, 'is terrible and we pretend it isnt.'"
By Philip Levine
"Yet when partisan politics get in the way of good intentions, policies and people suffer needlessly.Exhibit A: Florida.First, Gov.Ron DeSantis uses a libertarian, free-market approach to keep the state open while others closed shut.Now hes doing an about-face,dictating rules to ailing cruise companieswho want to set sail swiftly and safely."
By Connie Rice
"To my fellow Americans I have an urgent alarm: Stop distractifying over 'wokeness'and deal with the wolf at the door. Firing folks over 'forbidden'words or views is absurd. Shaming the interracially clueless is counterproductive.But arguing 'wokeness'right now is the strategic equivalent of Titanic musicians debating preludes."
No guns allowed(Photo: USA TODAY Handout)
By Brandon Wolf
"Gunshots endless gunshots filled my ears. I crouched in a dark corner of the bathroom. The smell of blood and smoke singed my nose. Finally, I made a break for the door. I didnt look right; I didnt look left. I just ran. When I dialed Drews number over and over, no one picked up."
ByJon Patricof, Cheri Kempf
"Over the past weeks, softball fans have marked the end of stellar collegiate careers for the likes ofGiselle Juarez, Sis Bates, Dejah Mulipola and Carrie Eberle. But the end of this chapter of their careers marks the start of another one and a chance for fans to continue to follow them:All four were among 12 selected in our first college draft and have been invited to join Athletes Unlimited Softballs second season, which starts this August and will air onCBS Sports Network and Fox Sports."
By The Editorial Board
"If anything, the contrast with Trump's 2018 summit was so stark, it was almost as if roles were reversed. Putin, who spoke to the news media first, complimented Biden as experienced,professional and a man of 'attractive'moral values. 'It seems to me we did speak the same language,'Putin said."
Stop the steal(Photo: USA TODAY Handout)
By Andrea O'Sullivan
"Ransomware attacks happen frequently, but they usually dont shut down gasoline sales on much of the East Coast. These cyberattacks target systems by encrypting or shutting users out from computers until they pay the attackers. Many businesses have had to deal with the headache of ransomware, and it can bemore cost effectiveto just pay the attackers, asColonial Pipeline eventually did."
By Meme Styles
"Like many of their predecessors, 21st century police reform advocates are emotionally intelligent, data driven, socially awareand relentless in the pursuit of justice for all especially those historically and disproportionately impacted by police brutality. Accountability is their armor, and evidence is their driver."
Older vehicles on US roads(Photo: USA TODAY Handout)
By Tim Swarens
"To me, that's sad because coworkers ought be able to share a lunch room without fear of political strife.It's alarming because people will put up with bullying and it is bullying when we're forced into silence to keep the peace for only so long."
By Connie Schultz
"This yard of trees is our map, perhaps, for our grandchildren. It is a story of love and resilience that began with a marriage of second chances and grew into our version of a family tree."
Autoplay
Show Thumbnails
Show Captions
Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/06/19/putin-vaccine-passports-shooting-and-bitcoin-top-columns/7734563002/
More here:
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on Joe Biden’s meeting with Putin, vaccine passports, nightclub shootings, and other top columns – USA TODAY
Anthony Bland affirms plan to run for governor – Arkansas Times
Posted: at 1:07 am
Anthony Bland affirms plan to run for governor - Arkansas Times
ANTHONY BLAND
Anthony Bland, a Little Rock teacher and minister, said hell formally announce as a Democratic candidate for governor at 1 p.m. Wednesday in Hot Springs.
He was the Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor in 2018. (I left lieutenant out of the original post.)
His announcement today said:
Many of The Working Poor feel marginalized within their own communities, Dr. Bland wants to provide them with useful resources and opportunities required to pull themselves out of poverty.
Dr. Bland as Governor will enhance the Education System, improve the Healthcare System, work to reform the Criminal Justice System, and improve the Job opportunities for Arkansans, as you may well be aware that many young adults leave Arkansas for better career and job opportunities elsewhere. It is vital for the growth of Arkansas that we retain our talented young people here in the State Of Arkansas.
Other Democrats whove announced: Chris Jones, Rus Russell and Supha Xaysprasith-Mays. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Leslie Rutledge have announced as Republicans to succeed term-limited Governor Hutchinson. Ricky Dale Harrinton Jr. has said hell be a Libertarian candidate.
More here:
Anthony Bland affirms plan to run for governor - Arkansas Times
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on Anthony Bland affirms plan to run for governor – Arkansas Times
Why the Texas ACA Suit Was Always Destined to Fail (Even on a 6-3 Court) – Reason
Posted: at 1:07 am
From the very beginning, I was among those that said the claims inCalifornia v. Texas were categorically different from those in prior Affordable Care Act cases and would ultimately fail. (My prior posts on this litigation are indexed here.) The question was never whether Texas would lose, but how and when. I further said repeatedly that the claims would be lucky to get two votes on the Supreme Court.
What distinguished the claims inCalifornia v. Texas from the claims inNFIB v. Sebelius andKing v. Burwell was not merely relative weakness of the arguments, but also the lack of any grounding in conservative jurisprudence. The arguments underlying aggressive legal challenges often seem weak at first. If they are to go from "off the wall" to "on the wall" they need to be grounded in sound legal principles. Planted in the fertile soil of an underlying jurisprudence, even apparently outlandish legal arguments may blossom. Legal arguments motivated by nothing more than policy aims, on the other hand, are likely to wither.
The claims in NFIBwere grounded in longstanding concern about maintaining the limits on enumerated powers. The individual mandate and Medicaid expansion both represented unprecedented assertions of federal power, and the arguments against each were directly tied to principled arguments about the need for judicially enforceable limits on federal power. (Some of us here at the VC were involved in developing those arguments, as documented in our book, A Conspiracy Against Obamacare.) Thus the arguments inNFIBwere not merely about the ACA. They were about vindicating a constitutional principle that has long been embraced by conservative and libertarian legal scholars and jurists.
Just as the arguments inNFIB were grounded in a core conservative constitutional principle, the arguments inKing v. Burwell were grounded in a core conservative interpretive principle: that the meaning of a statute is controlled by the statute's text. The idea that words in a statute mean what they mean was not invented for this case. The argument that statutory interpretation must be grounded in and anchored by the statutory text have been made for decades. Moreover, the central arguments in King were developed and advanced before there was even any prospect of litigation. (In my case, I first spoke and published on the meaning of the relevant provisions of the ACA before NFIB had been decided and when it still looked as if every state would create their own exchange.) The arguments were no doubt supported by many who saw them as a means to attack the ACA, but the arguments themselves involved straightforward textualist analysis of the relevant provisions in their broader statutory context. (The Court'sKing opinion, on the other hand, not so much.)
California v. Texas, in contrast toNFIBandKing, was not moored to any underlying jurisprudential principle. IfNFIB was about limited and enumerated powers andKing was about text, California v. Texaswas about what exactly? Hamstringing the legislature's ability to use reconciliation? Turning statutory challenges into games of Jenga? In the end, the case was really about nothing more than slaying the ACA by any means necessary. This explains why it prompted significant opposition on the Right found greater support from state attorneys general than from conservative and libertarian legal scholars (as illustrated by the line-up of amicus briefs). Hating on the ACA may win a Republican primary or fill fundraising coffers, but it's not enough to win over a majority of justices.
Not only were the core legal arguments in California v. Texas unmoored from conservative jurisprudence, key elements of the case actually challenged longstanding conservative principle. As I've explained in prior posts, for the plaintiffs to prevail, the Court would have had to abandon longstanding constraints on Article III standing, adopt selective and result-oriented purposivist analyses of legislative intent, and invent a new approach to severability at odds with any notion of remedial restraint.
All of this meant that the headwinds against the arguments in Calfornia v. Texas were simply too strong to be overcome. To some of us, that this would be so was obvious from the start.
The rest is here:
Why the Texas ACA Suit Was Always Destined to Fail (Even on a 6-3 Court) - Reason
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on Why the Texas ACA Suit Was Always Destined to Fail (Even on a 6-3 Court) – Reason
Biden Likely to Patch Things Up With Putin at Summit – Libertarian Party – UrduPoint News
Posted: at 1:07 am
WASHINGTON (UrduPoint News / Sputnik - 16th June, 2021) Joe Biden will likely repair relations with Vladimir Putin at the upcoming summit in Geneva, Gary Dye from the Libertarian Party told Sputnik, adding that the US media will present the American president in a more or less even way to help improve Biden's public image.
"Before the election, the Democratic Party tried to make Russia a great threat and enemy of the United States and it was all political... But now that Biden got elected and the Democrats kind of control the government here, they don't need to consider or say that Russia is this big huge enemy," Dye, who ran for election to the US Senate to represent Oregon, and who is now running for governor of Oregon, said.
He surmises that Biden is trying to bury the hatchet with Putin.
"He had this opportunity to do some bad things against Russia with some of these hackers that seem to be operating within Russia, but Biden didn't do anything. He didn't blame it on Putin. It's all about politics. And I think Biden is going to patch things up," he said.
Dye also believes that the American press is going to be "a little bit more even" while covering the Geneva summit.
"And they're going to try to help that process along and make Biden look like this genius who is able to deal with Russia or peacefully coexist, cooperate. I think it's going to be more of a cooperative press rather than a press that really starts slinging mud at Putin. They want to use this summit to improve Biden's public relations. And make him look like a really smart guy, that other countries like him," the politician continued.
According to Dye, most of the countries in Europe want to get along with Russia, have a "decent amount of trade" and abandon tensions.
"The Ukraine thing disrupted and made it very, very difficult for Western European countries to have decent relations with Russia or to at least not say bad things against Russia," he said.
Putin and Biden are set to face off at Geneva's 18th-century Villa La Grange later on Wednesday.
Visit link:
Biden Likely to Patch Things Up With Putin at Summit - Libertarian Party - UrduPoint News
Posted in Libertarian
Comments Off on Biden Likely to Patch Things Up With Putin at Summit – Libertarian Party – UrduPoint News
RAV Bahamas and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated (Bahamas): Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Rules on Substantial Injustice…
Posted: at 1:06 am
On 19 April 2021, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Privy Council) rendered its decision in RAV Bahamas and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated (Bahamas)1 (available here) on the requirement under Section 90 of the Bahamas Arbitration Act 2009 (Bahamas Act) for a party to separately and expressly plead, and for a court to separately and expressly find, substantial injustice where an award is challenged on the basis of a serious irregularity that affects the tribunal, the proceedings or the award. Section 90, which is materially identical to Section 68 of the English Arbitration Act 1996 (English Act), provides that a party may challenge an award on the basis of one or more enumerated kinds of irregularities which the court considers has caused or will cause substantial injustice to the applicant.
In summary, the Privy Council found the following:
The decision marks the first time in over 15 years that the substantial injustice requirement has been considered by a highest appellate court since the decision of the UK House of Lords in Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Impregilo SpA2 (available here). The Privy Council is comprised of Justices of the UK Supreme Court and serves as the court of final appeal for the UK overseas territories and Crown dependencies. Given the similarities between Section 90 of the Bahamas Act and Section 68 of the English Act, the decision will form an important part of the jurisprudence surrounding challenges to awards in English-seated arbitrations on grounds of serious irregularity. The reasoning of the Court will likely also be considered by courts of other jurisdictions that are called upon to address pleading requirements in challenges to awards.
The following sections set out the background to the dispute and summarise the findings of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal of the Bahamas, before discussing the decision of the Privy Council. The final section considers the implications of the decision.
I. BACKGROUND
The applicants (RAV) leased land to the respondent (Therapy) for the building and operations of a restaurant and beach club in the Bahamas called Sakara Beach Club (Sakara). The lease agreement contained an option to renew the lease for a further 5-year term that could be exercised on 6-months notice and was subject to the parties agreeing to rents for the renewal term.
The dispute arose out of delays in the development of the restaurant and the eventual eviction of Therapy from and demolition of Sakara by RAV. Therapy claimed that it had been wrongfully evicted and sought lost profits for the duration of the lease and the renewal term, which spanned a total of 6 years. Therapy also sought lost profits in relation to a separate restaurant in the vicinity, Atlantic Seafood, on the basis that it formed part of the lease following a variation of the agreement by the parties. RAV denied all the claims.
The dispute was submitted to an ad hoc arbitration where the sole arbitrator found the following after a 6-day hearing: (i) Therapy had been wrongfully evicted form Sakara; (ii) the lease had not been varied by the parties to include Atlantic Seafood; and (iii) Therapy was entitled to its lost profits in relation to Sakara for the entire 6-year period. In assessing Therapys damages, the arbitrator relied on the evidence of Therapys quantum expert but discounted the damages in two ways to exclude any losses flowing from the claim in relation to Atlantic Seafood and to account for the fact that the experts analysis was not based on documentary evidence. The parties had not made specific submissions on any discounts to be applied to Therapys damages, including in the event Therapy lost any part of its claims. Therapy was awarded a total of $ 9.67 million, plus interest.
RAV challenged the award under Section 90 of the Bahamas Act on two grounds:
In the first instance, the Supreme Court of the Bahamas upheld the challenge on both grounds and remitted the award to the arbitrator for further consideration. The Court found that Therapys losses for the renewal term depended on whether the lease had been validly renewed. The award indicated that the arbitrator had not considered this issue that was important to Therapys entitlement to damages. The Court also found that the arbitrator had not given the parties an opportunity to address the method of adjusting Therapys damages, which was only brought to the parties attention in the award itself. The Court did not, however, make any express or separate finding that the serious irregularities caused RAV substantial injustice.
By a majority, the Court of Appeal of the Bahamas set aside the first instance decision and upheld the award. Relying on the House of Lords decision in Lesotho, the Court held that a serious irregularity challenge required a showing, as a precondition, that there had been substantial injustice. Here, the Court found that (i) RAV did not expressly and separately plead and establish that it had suffered or would suffer substantial injustice as a result of the irregularities; and (ii) the Supreme Court failed to make an express and separate finding on the issue of substantial injustice. The Court considered that the real complaint made by RAV was that the arbitrator had made errors of law.
II. PRIVY COUNCIL DECISION
The main issue of interpretation before the Privy Council, as expressed by the Court, was whether section 90 requires there to be a separate and express allegation, consideration and finding of substantial injustice for a serious irregularity to be established.3 As discussed below, the Privy Council answered that question in the negative and remitted the award to the arbitrator on terms largely consistent with findings of the Supreme Court.
A. Separate and Express Allegation and Finding of Substantial Injustice
The Privy Council began its discussion of the substantial injustice requirement by stressing the narrow scope of application of Section 90 to challenge awards. Recalling well-established case law, the Privy Council emphasised that the English Act, which its Bahamian counterpart is based on, was designed to significantly reduce the extent of judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings. Section 68 of the English Act (like Section 90 of the Bahamas Act) forms an integral part of that design by permitting challenges to awards where (i) there is a serious irregularity, as identified in the closed list of irregularities in Section 90; and (ii) that has caused or will cause the applicant substantial injustice.4 The burden of proof rests on the applicant challenging the award.5
Reiterating the explanatory notes of the Department Advisory Committee in drafting the English Act and the House of Lords decision in Lesotho, the Privy Council stressed the high threshold and high hurdle imposed by the serious irregularity limb of Section 68,6 which was only available in extreme cases where the tribunal has gone so wrong in its conduct of the arbitration that justice calls out for it to be corrected.7 The purpose of Section 68 was to ensure due process in the arbitral proceedings, not that a correct decision had been reached.8
The substantial injustice requirement in Section 68 provides a further hurdle to a challenge. As aptly described by the House of Lords in Lesotho, it is designed to weed out technical and unmeritorious challenges.9 The Privy Council noted that there will be substantial injustice where it is established that, had the irregularity not occurred, the outcome of the arbitration might have been different.10 Importantly, the Privy Council recognised that some irregularities may be so serious that substantial injustice is inherently likely to result11 and an inference of substantial injustice almost goes without saying.12
Turning to the issue before it, the Privy Council considered that it is good practice for an applicant raising a Section 90 challenge (or Section 68 under the English Act) to set out in its pleadings the listed irregularity in Section 90 that it relied upon, its grounds for asserting the existence of the irregularity in its case and that the irregularity has caused or will cause it substantial injustice.13 It would equally be good practice for a court to specifically consider each of these issues. However, that good practice did not amount to a mandatory requirement,14 a failure of which would itself defeat an application.15 The Privy Council cautioned against undue formalism where, on the facts, substantial injustice is apparent.16
B. Failure to Address Issues Put To The Arbitrator
The Privy Council agreed with the Supreme Court, upholding the challenge to the award on Ground 1 on the basis that the arbitrator failed to consider whether the lease had been validly renewed.
After reviewing the record, including the pleadings and transcripts of the hearing before the arbitrator, the Court found that the issue of whether the lease had been validly renewed had been put before, and sufficiently drawn to the attention of, the arbitrator. This was an issue that the arbitrator ought to have dealt with because it was essential or crucial to the determination of the parties claims and defences.17 Put simply, the arbitrator could not have concluded that Therapy was entitled to damages for the renewal term without first determining whether the lease had been validly renewed, giving Therapy a right to use the premises for that period. The question was whether the issue had, in fact, been dealt with by the arbitrator.
In undertaking that analysis, the Court cautioned against adopting a hypercritical or excessively syntactical reading and instead urged the use of a fair, commercial and commonsense reading.18 The courts must give arbitrators a wide margin of deference to determine how to address an issue, which they can do in any way. On reviewing the award, however, the Court found that the arbitrator made no reference to or ruling on the lease renewal. Importantly, the Court also found that it could not infer that the arbitrator had implicitly rejected the point because the award did not refer to it at all.19
While RAVs application challenging the award did not made specific reference to the substantial injustice caused by this omission, the Court found that this was apparent because the failure was described in the pleadings as critical and as affecting a large portion of the award.20 In upholding the challenge, the Supreme Court used similar language, which in effect amounted to a finding of substantial injustice.21 The Court found that the nature of the irregularity and failure of due process in the present case meant substantial injustice was inherently likely.22
C. Failure to Provide Opportunity To Make Representations
The Privy Council partially agreed with the Supreme Court to uphold the challenge to the award on Ground 2 on the basis that the arbitrator failed to give RAV an opportunity to address the appropriate discount to be applied to Therapys damages.
The Court recalled that natural justice requires parties to have an opportunity to address arbitrators on specific matters that an award is based on and, conversely, parties should not learn of adverse points for the first time in the award itself.23 As with a failure to address issues, the Court urged a careful approach in determining whether a party had been deprived of a right to present its case.24
On the facts, the Court found that there was no irregularity in the arbitrators approach of applying a 15% discount to the quantification of damages by Therapys expert. The Court considered that it should have been obvious that there were weaknesses in Therapys expert evidence because it was not supported by documentary evidence.25
On the one-third deduction in damages for the Atlantic Seafood claim, however, the Court found that RAV had not been given an opportunity to address the arbitrator. In reaching that conclusion, the Court disagreed with the finding of the Court of Appeal that it was sufficient that the parties knew that consequential damages were in issue and that the parties could make whatever representation they considered appropriate.26 On substantial injustice, and as with Ground 1, the Court held that it goes without saying and is self-evident that an arbitrary deduction of damages is seriously prejudicial.27 RAVs failure to expressly plead the point, and the lack of an express finding by the Supreme Court, were not fatal.
III. IMPLICATIONS
As a judgment of the Privy Council on a provision that is materially identical to Section 68 of the English Act, the RAV decision forms part of an important body of law on challenges to awards in English-seated arbitrations.
The decision marks a pragmatic approach of the English courts to pleading requirements for substantial injustice, which is a welcome clarification on the application of Section 68. Given the strong persuasive effect of English judgments on courts of other Commonwealth jurisdictions, the RAV decision will also provide a useful starting point for analysis when similar issues arise in the context of other arbitral laws. While the Court eschewed a formalistic approach, to avoid protracted litigation on whether the requirements of Section 68 have been properly established, parties would be well advised to clearly plead the specific irregularity under Section 68 on which they rely to challenge an award and to explain why that irregularity has caused or will cause the party substantial injustice.
While the Privy Council upheld the challenge on the facts of the case, it bears emphasis, that the irregularities in question in the RAV decision were significant and could have had a material impact on the outcome of the award. The Privy Council was careful to reiterate prior case law and emphasise that challenges under Section 90 (and Section 68 of the English Act) would not easily succeed. The Courts pragmatism in the RAV decision should not, therefore, be mistaken as a harbinger for a more interventionist approach by the English courts.
Footnotes -
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8.
Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Impregilo SpA [2005] UKHL 43.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 2.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at paras. 28, 52.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 52.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 31.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 30 (citing the Report of the Department Advisory Committee).
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 32.
Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Impregilo SpA [2005] UKHL 43, at para. 28 (per Lord Steyn).
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 34.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 35 (citing Ascot Commodities NV v Olam International Ltd [2002] CLC 277 at pp 284F-285A)
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 36 (citing Secretary of State for the Home Department v Raytheon Systems Ltd [2014] EWHC 4375 (TCC), at para. 61)
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 53.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 54.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 88.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at paras. 72-74.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 41.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 43 (citing Secretary of State for the Home Department v Raytheon Systems Ltd [2014] EWHC 4375 (TCC), at para. 33).
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 61.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 65.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 67.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 69.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 46 (citing to Zermalt Holdings SA v Nu-Life Upholstery Repairs Ltd [1985] 2 EGLR 14, at p. 15)
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 50.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 586.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at paras. 81-82.
RAV Bahamas Ltd and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated [2021] UKPC 8, at para. 84.
See the original post here:
Posted in Bahamas
Comments Off on RAV Bahamas and another v Therapy Beach Club Incorporated (Bahamas): Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Rules on Substantial Injustice…