Court: Indian candidates can't use faith, caste to get votes
Ethics
India's top court has ruled that election candidates cannot use religion or caste to seek votes, describing them as corrupt practices under electoral laws.
India has a Hindu-nationalist government, and most political parties select candidates in various districts based on caste and religious considerations.
The ruling on Monday is considered significant as it comes months before elections in Uttar Pradesh state where dominant campaign issues are caste affiliations and the building of a Hindu temple in place of a 16th century mosque demolished by Hindu hardliners.
Legislature elections are also due in Punjab, Uttarakhand, Goa and Manipur states.
Hindus constitute nearly 80 percent of India's 1.25 billion people, while Muslims comprise 14.2 percent and the remaining 6 percent adhere to other religions, such as Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism.
Related listings
-
Supreme Court stays execution of Alabama inmate
Ethics 11/14/2016The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday night stayed the execution of an Alabama man convicted of the 1982 shooting death of a woman's husband in a murder-for-hire arrangement. Five justices voted to stay the execution of Tommy Arthur as the high court co...
-
Court rules man treated for mental illness can have a gun
Ethics 09/17/2016A Michigan man who can't buy a gun because he was briefly treated for mental health problems in the 1980s has won a key decision from a federal appeals court, which says the burden is on the government to justify a lifetime ban against him. The Secon...
-
LA Supreme Court considers teen robber’s 99-year sentence
Ethics 09/14/2016Louisiana’s Supreme Court is considering whether recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings about juveniles convicted of murder mean a juvenile robber’s 99-year sentence is unconstitutional. Alden Morgan is now 35. He was 17 years old when he held up a couple...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0096f/0096fc8e9a6fca7cdd0ea81063fccc031be46cea" alt=""
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.