深圳环保体验报告

Springboks revival sees them on the brink of becoming most successful Rugby World Cup team

first_imgTuesday Oct 29, 2019 Springboks revival sees them on the brink of becoming most successful Rugby World Cup team When it comes to Rugby World Cup records, New Zealand have won three tournaments, South Africa and Australia two each, and England one. Should South Africa beat England this coming weekend, they will join the All Blacks on three, but have a better overall record.ADVERTISEMENTTwo years ago the Springboks had plunged to one of the lowest points in their proud history. On Saturday they will play in the Rugby World Cup final in Yokohama.It’s quite the turnaround and Rassie Erasmus has been instrumental. The South Africa coach has restored pride in the Boks jersey and driven home to his players what it means to play for your country.Then came the more tactical changes, getting the team to play the Springboks way – physical, straightforward, focusing on the set piece. All that was on display in the 19-16 win over Wales in their World Cup semi-final.“He made it clear that the Springbok is the most important thing,” said Siya Kolisi, the player Erasmus appointed South Africa’s first black rugby captain.“In the past, most of us tried to build ourselves by our social media and he just brought us back to earth, and told us you have to play well and everything else will come.“To see it come together and hopefully go all the way… I’m really looking forward to the final.”ADVERTISEMENTThe Springbok record at Rugby World Cups is impressive. In just 6 tournaments (after missing 1987 and 1991 due to political sanctions), they’ve won twice, come third twice and have been in two quarter finals.Should they win on Saturday, that will make them equal with New Zealand on 3 tournament wins, however, New Zealand have done it in nine tournaments, while South Africa will have done it in just 7.England will certainly start as favourites in the final and will be gunning for their second tournament win, but South Africa are the Rugby Championship title-holders and wedded to a successful game plan so it is likely to be far closer than some England fans are predicting.ADVERTISEMENT“I’m not 100 per cent sure the World Cup final is going to be won by a very expansive game plan and wonderful tries,” coach Erasmus said. “We will go and grind it out.”“We certainly accept that there are some things in the game that we have to improve, and we take it on the chin.“But we feel that we have put ourselves in a position to maybe win the World Cup, and we are in the final. Yes, we accept the criticism, but we are also happy that we are in the position to compete for a World Cup final, which is where we ultimately want to be.” SOUTH AFRICA’S RUGBY WORLD CUP RECORD:1987 did not take part (New Zealand winners)1991 did not take part (Australia winners)1995 South Africa winners1999 Third Place (Australia winners)2003 Quarter Finals (England winners)2007 South Africa winners2011 Quarter Finals (New Zealand winners)2015 Third place (New Zealand winners)2019 Runners up or winnersCoach Rassie Erasmus on what it means to be a Springbok: Posted By: rugbydump Share Send Thanks Sorry there has been an error Rugby World Cup Related Articles 25 WEEKS AGO If you can get your head around it, these… 47 WEEKS AGO You’ve never seen any Rugby World Cup drop… 49 WEEKS AGO TOP 10: Rugby World Cup 2015 was filled with… From the WebThis Video Will Soon Be Banned. Watch Before It’s DeletedSecrets RevealedYou Won’t Believe What the World’s Most Beautiful Girl Looks Like TodayNueeyUrologists Stunned: Forget the Blue Pill, This “Fixes” Your EDSmart Life ReportsDoctors Stunned: She Removes Her Wrinkles With This Inexpensive TipSmart Life ReportsIf You Have Ringing Ears Do This Immediately (Ends Tinnitus)Healthier Living30+ Everyday Items with a Secret Hidden PurposeNueeyThe content you see here is paid for by the advertiser or content provider whose link you click on, and is recommended to you by Revcontent. As the leading platform for native advertising and content recommendation, Revcontent uses interest based targeting to select content that we think will be of particular interest to you. We encourage you to view your opt out options in Revcontent’s Privacy PolicyWant your content to appear on sites like this?Increase Your Engagement Now!Want to report this publisher’s content as misinformation?Submit a ReportGot it, thanks!Remove Content Link?Please choose a reason below:Fake NewsMisleadingNot InterestedOffensiveRepetitiveSubmitCancellast_img read more

Pecuniary Jurisdiction Of Consumer Fora To Be Determined By Value Of Goods/ Services ‘Paid’ As Consideration: NCDRC [Read Order]

first_imgNews UpdatesPecuniary Jurisdiction Of Consumer Fora To Be Determined By Value Of Goods/ Services ‘Paid’ As Consideration: NCDRC [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK4 Sep 2020 11:13 PMShare This – xIn a significant order, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has held that for determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of Consumer fora, the value of the goods/ services “paid” as consideration alone has to be taken and not the value of the goods/ services “purchased”. The order has been passed by a bench of Justice RK Agrawal (President) and Dr. SM…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?LoginIn a significant order, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has held that for determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of Consumer fora, the value of the goods/ services “paid” as consideration alone has to be taken and not the value of the goods/ services “purchased”. The order has been passed by a bench of Justice RK Agrawal (President) and Dr. SM Kantikar (Member) while hearing a consumer complaint filed on behalf of a Kolkata based factory against its insurer, National Insurance Company Ltd. The Complainant stated that the company had wrongly repudiated his insurance claim worth Rs. Rs.28,00,20,000/- which was purchased by paying a premium of Rs.4,43,562/-. At this juncture, the Commission stated that the value of the consideration paid in the present case was “less” than Rs.10,00,00,000/- (pecuniary jurisdiction of NCDRC as per Section 58(1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019) and it had to determine whether the complaint shall be maintainable before it. It observed that had the case been governed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, NCDRC would have jurisdiction in the matter since pecuniary jurisdiction thereunder was determined by taking the “value of the goods or services and compensation”. Meaning thereby that the value of the goods or services as also the compensation would be added to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the National Commission has the jurisdiction or not Under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the National Commission had the jurisdiction to entertain Complaints where the value of the good or services and compensation claimed exceeded Rs.1,00,00,000/-. Under the new law however, the National Commission has jurisdiction to entertain Complaints where the “value of the goods or services paid” as consideration exceeds Rs.10,00,00,000/-. This change, the Commission said, was intended to ensure that Consumers approach the “appropriate” Consumer fora. It illustrated that under the erstwhile Act of 1986, if a person agreed to purchase a property for Rs. 60,00,000/- and later he approached the Consumer Forum seeking refund along with compensation of Rs. 50,00,000/- then the value would exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- and the Consumer Complaint was filed before the National Commission. The Commission said that the words “and compensation” were replaced with the word “paid” certainly to prevent consumers from directly approaching the National Commission. “It appears that the Parliament, while enacting the Act of 2019 was conscious of this fact and to ensure that Consumer should approach the appropriate Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission whether it is District, State or National only the value of the consideration paid should be taken into consideration while determining the pecuniary jurisdiction and not value of the goods or services and compensation, and that is why a specific provision has been made in Sections 34 (1), 47 (1) (a) (i) and 58 (1) (a) (i) providing for the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and the National Commission respectively,” it held. Case Title: M/S. Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. Click Here To Download OrderRead Order Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more