Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
282 result(s) for "Institutional Practice - legislation "
Sort by:
BMA is encouraged by Hunt’s reassurances on junior doctors’ contract but seeks clarification
In the letter to Johann Malawana, chair of the BMA's Junior Doctors Committee, Hunt said that the new contract would not cut junior doctors' pay or increase their working hours. The letter comes after Dan Poulter, a former Conservative health minister, criticised the government's handling of the junior doctors' contract. 2 Sarah Wollaston, conservative MP and chair of the parliamentary health select committee, has also expressed concerns about the consequences of imposing the new contract on junior doctors. 3 Responding to Hunt's letter, Maureen Baker, chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners, said she was pleased that Hunt had \"listened to our concerns, particularly around GP recruitment with the inclusion of pay protection for doctors who change to shortage specialties such as general practice.\"
The Ordinary and the Extraordinary in Institutional Litigation
Institutional litigation, in which courts are requested to oversee the operation of large public institutions, has been frequently attacked as a departure from the traditional model of litigation. In this Article, Professors Eisenberg and Yeazell argue that the procedures and remedies employed in institutional litigation are not unprecedented but have analogues in older judicial traditions. Nor, they assert, do the doctrines of separation of powers and federalism present any obstacles to institutional litigation. They conclude that the novelty lies in the newly created substantive rights which courts are asked to enforce.