Print Email Limerick hutler Will O’Donoghue taking part in last year’s Christmas sleep-out for Novas.IN normal years, the Novas’ fundraising programme of activities concludes with an annual sleep-out on the last Friday before Christmas.However, there is nothing normal about 2020 and instead of a large community event, this year the local homeless charity is asking people to ‘sleep-in’ in their own homes and help raise vital funds for frontline homeless services.For the last five years, Novas has hosted the pre-Christmas sleep-out outside Brown Thomas, which has raised thousands of euros for its Limerick services.Last year, backed by Limerick hurler Will O’Donoghue, Clare hurler and footballer Podge Collins and the Tipperary hurling panel, the organisation ran three simultaneous events in Limerick, Ennis and Thurles and raised more than €64,000.Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up Novas’ Head of Policy and Communications, Dr Una Burns explained that the sleep-out is normally the biggest single fundraising event of the year and the money raised helps their frontline services such as Street Outreach, emergency accommodation and family support.“About 50 per cent of all monies raised through fundraising and donations in the year, is made in the six -week period in the run up to Christmas. This is largely through community and public events, all of which have had to be paused during the pandemic,” Dr Burns told the Limerick Post.In an effort to continue the fundraising spirit of Christmas, Novas are asking people to participate in their sleep-in this year.”Safety is the first priority but there are still plenty of ways to get involved. People can build a fort in their living room with the kids, pitch a tent in their garden, sleep on their balcony or participate with colleagues in the car park or their workplace. Being a virtual event, people can basically participate from anywhere and for the first time, they can get the kids involved.”To help Novas raise vital funds visit https://novas.ie/novas-annual-christmas-sleep-in/ Facebook Twitter Advertisement Previous articleLIT launches course on domestic abuse and coercive controlNext article#Fundraising: Santa paws is coming to town Alan Jacqueshttp://www.limerickpost.ie WhatsApp NewsSociety#Fundraising” Novas holding a Christmas ‘sleep-in’ to replace their ‘sleep-out’ By Alan Jacques – December 4, 2020 122 Linkedin
News UpdatesMadras HC Denies Interim Relief To Cooperative Banks Against 2020 Ordinance Subjecting Them To RBI Supervision [Read Order] Mehal Jain21 July 2020 1:33 AMShare This – xThe Madras high court on Monday refused immediate interim relief to cooperative banks which have challenged the Centre’s ordinance bringing them under the purview of the RBI.The two petitioners before Chief Justice A. P. Shah and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy are “some of the pioneers in Cooperative Banking in this country and their activities date back almost to a century”. They have…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?LoginThe Madras high court on Monday refused immediate interim relief to cooperative banks which have challenged the Centre’s ordinance bringing them under the purview of the RBI.The two petitioners before Chief Justice A. P. Shah and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy are “some of the pioneers in Cooperative Banking in this country and their activities date back almost to a century”. They have pitched up a challenge to the constitutional validity of certain Sections of the Banking Regulation Amendment Ordinance, 2020 promulgated on 26.06.2020 as being ultra vires the Constitution of India. It is alleged that, in addition to matters relating to “banking”, the Ordinance has given the RBI extensive jurisdiction over the Cooperative Banks even in those pertaining to “incorporation, regulation and winding up”, placing them at par with commercial banks: in aspects relating to share capital and access to funds, which is an essential facet of the very incorporation of the cooperative bank; in essential aspects of management of cooperative banks, which were previously governed by the concerned state legislations – voting rights, restrictions on persons who can be appointed as directors in the cooperative banks; audit obligations; etc.It is urged that the impugned Ordinance legislates on subject matters which are entirely beyond the legislative competence of the Union Parliament and cannot be presumed to be covered by Entries 43 and 45 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, in as much as the petitioners are Cooperative Societies. It is contended that, therefore, the impugned Ordinance amounts to impinging upon the rights of the Cooperative Societies to be governed exclusively by State framed law, which stands protected by virtue of Entry 32 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. The argument is that the incorporation, organization, regulation and functioning of the cooperative society by itself would not constitute the activity of Banking, which is managed as a business by the Cooperative Society and, therefore, the impugned Ordinance, which encroaches upon this field of legislation, is totally beyond the Ordinance making power of the Centre and parliamentary competence and hence, the Ordinance deserves to be struck down.Appreciating the ratio of the May 5 judgment of the SC 5-judge bench in the case of Pandurang Ganpati Chaugule, the division bench noted that prima facie the issue that has been raised is that the introduction of the impugned provisions of the Ordinance, whereby a substantial amendment has been made in Part V of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, proceeds to bring about substantial changes that would affect the incorporation, regulation and winding up of Cooperative Societies, which in turn amounts to intruding upon the affairs of a Cooperative Society running a Cooperative Bank.The top court, on May 5, has held that the SARFAESI Act is applicable to cooperative banks. “The cooperative banks under the State legislation and multi State cooperative banks are ‘banks’ under section 2(1)(c) of the SARFAESI Act”, held the Constitution Bench. The Court rejected the argument that the 2013 amendment to the SARFAESI Act adding ‘multi-state cooperative bank’ in Section 2(1)(c)(iva) was a “colourable exercise of power”. The Court also upheld the 2003 notification issued under the Banking Regulation Act 1949 by which ‘co-operative bank’ was brought within the class of banks entitled to seek recourse to the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The 5-judge bench unanimously held that the Parliament had the legislative competence to bring cooperative banks under the ambit of SARFAESI Act. “We find that ‘banking’ relating to cooperatives can be included within the purview of Entry 45 of List I, and it cannot be said to be over inclusion to cover provisions of recovery by co-operative banks in the SARFAESI Act”, the judgment stated.Before the High Court, the cooperative banks argued that the aforesaid decision clearly saves the laws relating to incorporation, regulation and winding up of Cooperative Societies, the subject matter whereof falls exclusively within the competence of the State Legislature and hence, any law, including the impugned Ordinance, trenching upon Entry 32 of List II of the Constitution of India is liable to be struck down, as it is totally beyond the competence of the Parliament and, therefore, also beyond the Ordinance making power of the Centre. It is urged that the judgment categorically holds that the affairs of a Cooperative Society running a Bank, other than its banking affairs, would continue to be controlled by law made by the State Legislature exclusively under Entry 32 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.Observations of the High Court”The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 is there in place to control the banking affairs and to that extent the judgment in the case of Pandurang Ganpati Chaugule also indicates that banks run by Cooperative Society are governed by Entry 45 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. The question is as to whether all the affairs of a Cooperative Society running a bank, which is incorporated under the State enacted Cooperative Societies Act, would also be governed by Entry 45 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India?”, wondered the High Court.It further pointed out that “the issue is that if a Cooperative Society is carrying out only the business of banking, can it be said that all the affairs of such a Cooperative Society can be controlled by the law made under Entry 45 of List I, even if it overlaps the existing law which stands covered under Entry 32 of List II, and thereby make the State law redundant?”The division bench opined that the issue of incidental trenching would depend upon the concept of the existence of an entity as a Cooperative Society being so integral, and rather dissolved with its activity of Banking, so as to lose its very authority of governance in matters of incorporation, regulation and winding up and be overridden by a law made by the Parliament.”This interplay of the Entries, as explained by the Constitution Bench (in the May 5 ruling), leads to the debate from the expressions used in the judgment, as to whether a Cooperative Bank run by a Cooperative Society can continue to exist as an entity with the affairs of the society segregated and controlled in the aspects of incorporation, regulation and winding up by the law made by the State Legislature?”, the bench further reflected.The High Court was of the view that the ultimate answer would depend upon as to how far the impugned Ordinance proceeds to allegedly encroach upon such affairs of the Cooperative Society, which is running a Cooperative Bank, and as to whether the impugned provisions suffer from the vice of incompetence, and thereby ultra vires the Constitution of India.”The ambivalence of the constitutional provisions may have to be considered on the principles of the basic structure doctrine, involving constitutional federalism, and also to the extent of constitutional supremacy, which outlines the doctrine of separation and distribution of powers between its various organs, thereby ensuring to its citizens a rule under the Constitution, more particularly described as the Rule of Law”, opined the bench. It proceeded to observe that nonetheless the presumption of the constitutional validity of a law is a well known guiding principle, the barrier whereof has to be measurably calibrated before a certainty can be spelt out from the submissions raised on behalf of the petitioners.Having weighed the consequences, the bench found that for the grant of an interim relief “the sounding of a trumpet and war drums is sufficient to entertain a legal debate, the arbiter whereof is this Court”. However, it was their opinion that “unless there is an imminent tangible cause or evidence indicating actual invasion of the rights of the petitioner banks in running the affairs of the Society”, it would not be appropriate to consider the issue of interim relief at this stage.Accordingly, the division bench of the High Court left it open to be considered as and when any overt or covert act by the Central Government authorities or the Reserve Bank of India based upon the impugned provisions of the Ordinance actually impinges upon the functioning of the affairs of the Society, for which any appropriate material can be brought on record by the petitioner banks for such consideration.The bench granted 4 weeks’ time to the UOI and the RBI to file their replies.Click Here To Download Order[Read Order]Next Story
The Kark Review, led by Tom Kark QC, will look at how effective the Fit and Proper Persons Requirement is in preventing unsuitable staff from being redeployed or re-employed in the NHS, clinical commissioning groups, and independent healthcare and adult social care sectors.The current Fit and Proper Persons Requirement is designed to ensure that senior staff who are responsible for quality and safety of care, are fit and proper to be in their roles.The review was recommended by Dr Bill Kirkup in his report into Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust, in February 2018.For more information contact [email protected] The deadline for submitting evidence is 5pm on 12 October.
HONG KONG (AP) — The Lunar New Year holiday is usually a busy period for flower farms in Hong Kong, which gear up to sell plum blossoms, orchids and daffodils at flower markets during the festive season. But the pandemic and restrictions on such festive markets this year has many farms worried that they may be left with an oversupply of flowers. Traditionally, Lunar New Year fairs – known as “flower markets” in Cantonese – are held before the holidays, with thousands of florists and festive goods vendors hawking their wares to the public. This year, the Hong Kong government is restricting the markets to half-capacity with shorter business hours.
52SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr Is the lottery the new American dream? Imagine becoming vastly wealthy overnight. Being a winner of a multimillion dollar lottery certainly will be a life-changing event for almost every single lottery winner. But what about when the prize is an astronomical sum of $100 million, $200 million or $300 million? Various Powerball and state lotteries have reached vast sums, and lotteries elsewhere have as well.Future Powerball and state lottery ticket winners will become incredibly wealthy in an instant. Imagine being Joe Somebody and turning into Sir Joe the Magnificent overnight. Now imagine the unthinkable, where Sir Joe becomes Joe the Village Idiot in a very short time. Supposedly most lottery winners end up broke again. That just doesn’t seem right at all.24/7 Wall St. wants its readers, particularly those few who are lucky enough to win the lottery, to avoid some of the simple and complex mistakes that have taken other lottery winners into bankruptcy. Some lottery winners have even died. continue reading »
Cringe comedy, it seems, is still in vogue.MORE: How does iRacing work?”I got really hot and I sweat a lot,” DiBenedetto said to the camera before letting out an awkward chuckle.Post race recap. I do not feel very intimidating currently but you guys can still sense my rage pic.twitter.com/I8uK1lMNrr— Matt DiBenedetto (@mattdracing) April 19, 2020DiBenedetto had some fun with his DQ after completing 112 laps. Matt DiBenedetto is one misbehaved giraffe.The NASCAR driver inexplicably decided to don a full animal onesie Sunday afternoon in the iRacing Pro Series before getting booted from the event for intentionally ramming into Ryan Preece. He also recorded a bizarre video while still wearing the costume. Payback! @mattdracing has been parked after this incident with @RyanPreece_. pic.twitter.com/2lrKE6xu3O— FOX: NASCAR (@NASCARONFOX) April 19, [email protected]_ cut down on me, spun out due to it, then wrecked me intentionally for his screw up. Send me his damn address I’m ready to throw down 😂 pic.twitter.com/k5Gx5LJw58— Matt DiBenedetto (@mattdracing) April 19, 2020Matt Disqualifidetto— nascarcasm (@nascarcasm) April 19, 2020William Byron won the race at virtual Richmond. Timmy Hill finished second and Parker Kligerman came in third.Results from #ProInvitationalSeries race at virtual Richmond: pic.twitter.com/8Wu4h1dGhF— Bob Pockrass (@bobpockrass) April 19, 2020The iRacing Series has had strong early returns for NASCAR during the coronavirus pandemic, but has taken black eyes in recent weeks, most notably from Kyle Larson’s use of the N-word while on a live stream last weekend. Larson was fired by Chip Ganassi Racing as a result of the incident. He also lost his main sponsors.The next official iRacing event is scheduled for April 26, at virtual Talladega.