Sentence examples for substantive liability from inspiring English sources

We stated in Illinois Brick that § 4C did not establish any new substantive liability.

And it established that presumption not just for the question of substantive liability but also for the question of certification.

In the substantive liability rules effective in the Netherlands and Japan, a reader will probably find far fewer instances of disparities than she might imagine.

The presumption of reliance does not apply, and hence neither substantive liability will attach nor will certification be proper, unless materiality is shown.

That would be a correct procedure if Basic meant the rule it announced to govern only the question of substantive liability — what must be shown in order to prevail.

In my view, however, the Basic rule of fraud-on-the-market — a well functioning market plus purchase or sale in the market plus material misrepresentation known to the market establishes a necessary showing of reliance — governs not only the question of substantive liability, but also the question whether certification is proper.

But substantial liability is not unlimited liability.

The case the Second Circuit used to argue otherwise, Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., American Express asserts, reads as forbidding waivers of federal substantive law regarding liability.

Because the Illinois statute of repose for strict liability claims is substantive and the substantive law of Pennsylvania governs this case, Sunbeam cannot assert the Illinois statute of repose.

See id., at 242, and n. 2. In enforcing the statute, the Court treated the provision as part of a statutory liability which created a substantive right.

A statute of repose creates a "substantive" right to be free from liability after a set period of time, according to the CTS Corp.'s Supreme Court brief.