Livestock Feed Limited (LFL.mu) listed on the Stock Exchange of Mauritius under the Industrial holding sector has released it’s 2014 interim results for the half year.For more information about Livestock Feed Limited (LFL.mu) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Livestock Feed Limited (LFL.mu) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Livestock Feed Limited (LFL.mu) 2014 interim results for the half year.Company ProfileLivestock Feed Limited specialises in the production of animal feeds locally and regionally. The company is a pioneer in the manufacturing of animal feeds in Mauritius and collaborates with international partners who specialise in the same field such as Mixscience and Invivo, who are also leading groups in the European farming field. Livestock Feed Limited is listed on the Stock Exchange of Mauritius.
Produce Buying Company Limited (PBC.gh) listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange under the Food sector has released it’s 2016 prospectus For more information about Produce Buying Company Limited (PBC.gh) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Produce Buying Company Limited (PBC.gh) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Produce Buying Company Limited (PBC.gh) 2016 prospectus Company ProfileProduce Buying Company Limited (PBC) is a licensed buying company for cocoa. The company is one of the biggest dealers in cocoa, sheanut and other cash crops in West Africa sub-regions. PBC Ltd buys high quality cocoa beans and sheanuts from farmers, prepares and stores the stock in purpose-built warehouses and delivers graded and sealed stock to designated collection points at Take Over Centres. The stock is inspected, graded and sealed by the Ghana Cocoa Board’s Quality Control Department. The cocoa buying company operates in an environment of stiff competition from other licensed buying companies but has remained the highest cocoa purchaser for COCOBOD with a market share of about 30%. PBC Ltd has established alliances with other international cocoa trading companies to roll out schemes to increase the yield and acreage of cocoa among rural farmers and improve their livelihoods. Produce Buying Company Limited is listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange
Simply click below to discover how you can take advantage of this. Since hitting a nine-year low in March, the FTSE 100 has risen 24% in tandem with other global indices. The strong recovery of the index has prompted fears over a second major sell-off, but many shares are still trading far below average historic valuations. What’s more, there are plenty of quality stocks that I’d be happy to buy and hold at today’s prices. As such, choosing the best UK shares on the market today could massively boost your chances of making a million.The best UK shares on the marketFocusing on growth stocks is the best way to realise serious long-term gains, in my view. Companies whose shares have strong upside potential could deliver immense capital growth and significantly swell the size of your investment portfolio over time. Key characteristics to look out for in a good growth stock include strong historical earnings growth, a good return on equity and promising forward earnings growth.5G is here – and shares of this ‘sleeping giant’ could be a great way for you to potentially profit!According to one leading industry firm, the 5G boom could create a global industry worth US$12.3 TRILLION out of thin air…And if you click here we’ll show you something that could be key to unlocking 5G’s full potential…Companies such as Homeserve, Just Eat and Games Workshop immediately spring to my mind. Each has a track record of earnings growth over recent years and doesn’t look to be slowing down any time soon. On top of this, all three have had a relatively profitable period in the midst of the global pandemic. Albeit not a guarantee of future success, it’s certainly testament to the resilience of the underlying businesses.You won’t need me to tell you that the last few months have been a rough time for income investors. Dividends have been slashed left, right and centre. In fact, around half of the companies listed in the FTSE 100 have either cut or suspended payouts. Nevertheless, I’d still invest in the best UK shares that boast bulky yields to build serious wealth over time. Why? Well, it’s important to remember that dividends won’t stay suspended forever and as the economy continues to recover, they could be back sooner than many expect.In my eyes, some of the best UK dividend shares include the oil titans Royal Dutch Shell and BP. Despite being hammered by the coronavirus pandemic and the oil price war, I think the shares have huge recovery potential. Considering long-term opportunities in renewable energy, I reckon both are here to stay. Alternatively, pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, whose yield currently stands at 4.9%, could be a safer long-term play.Make a million from the stock market crashOnce you’ve invested in a handful of the best UK shares available on the market, the next part is easy. Hold for the long term. Doing so will allow you to ride out any temporary market downswings and ultimately, greatly increase your chances of making a million through compounding returns.To illustrate, let’s say you invested £500 a month into a diversified selection of top UK shares. Assuming an annual return of 9%, you’d have a portfolio worth £1,031,550m after 32 years.Ultimately, buying the best UK shares and holding them for the long term is a tried and tested method of building serious capital. It could even lead to you achieving a seven-figure portfolio. So what are you waiting for? I would like to receive emails from you about product information and offers from The Fool and its business partners. Each of these emails will provide a link to unsubscribe from future emails. More information about how The Fool collects, stores, and handles personal data is available in its Privacy Statement. Image source: Getty Images Renowned stock-picker Mark Rogers and his analyst team at The Motley Fool UK have named 6 shares that they believe UK investors should consider buying NOW.So if you’re looking for more stock ideas to try and best position your portfolio today, then it might be a good day for you. Because we’re offering a full 33% off your first year of membership to our flagship share-tipping service, backed by our ‘no quibbles’ 30-day subscription fee refund guarantee. I think these are the best UK shares that could help you make a million from the stock market crash “This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997” Matthew Dumigan owns shares in Royal Dutch Shell. The Motley Fool UK owns shares of and has recommended GlaxoSmithKline. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Homeserve and Just Eat Takeaway.com N.V. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Our 6 ‘Best Buys Now’ Shares I’m sure you’ll agree that’s quite the statement from Motley Fool Co-Founder Tom Gardner.But since our US analyst team first recommended shares in this unique tech stock back in 2016, the value has soared.What’s more, we firmly believe there’s still plenty of upside in its future. In fact, even throughout the current coronavirus crisis, its performance has been beating Wall St expectations.And right now, we’re giving you a chance to discover exactly what has got our analysts all fired up about this niche industry phenomenon, in our FREE special report, A Top US Share From The Motley Fool. Enter Your Email Address Click here to claim your copy now — and we’ll tell you the name of this Top US Share… free of charge! Matthew Dumigan | Wednesday, 8th July, 2020 See all posts by Matthew Dumigan
This is Part 3 of an interview conducted after an April 15 rebellion at Lee Correctional Institution, a South Carolina maximum security prison. Jared Ware spoke with individuals inside Lee, including one who identified himself as a member of Jailhouse Lawyers Speak, a group of imprisoned human rights advocates who have called for a National Prison Strike from Aug. 21 to Sept. 9.Jared Ware: I’ve heard some reporting on how high the death numbers are from South Carolina over the past couple years, but I’ve also heard from some prisoners that they believe the death numbers are actually much higher than what’s being reported.S: Yeah, they are only reporting certain kinds of deaths, not including some deaths that they have caused themselves. Just to give you an example, they have a cell in the area they call the RHU (Restrictive Housing Unit) that’s supposed to be the area they put people that get in trouble or whatever. And they’ve got a cell that’s called a CI (Crisis Intervention) cell. That’s where they strip you, make you get butt-naked, you got no clothes on, no nothing, and when they do bring you something, they’ll bring you a suicide blanket only.A guy years ago, he said he was going to kill himself, so they put him in the CI. The guy told one of the lieutenants later on that night he was cool. The lieutenant gave the man a sheet, and then they say the man hanged himself. But by policy and by rule, nobody is supposed to have [any] sheets in [any] CI cell, and everybody know that, especially the lieutenant, who’s a supervisor. So that’s their fault. He was a mentally ill patient. That’s on them.D: Absolutely. I’d like to add to that. One of the reasons why the number is probably higher as well is they’re dealing with medical neglect. We’ve seen incidents where guys fall out, [and] get no medical treatment whatsoever. I consider those direct murders, as well, of the state. When staff are failing to respond or respond and say, “Oh, you’re faking it, you’re not having a heart attack,” and you fall out and die right there. We saw that happen several times as well. So this also would account for why some of the prisoners would say that these numbers definitely would be higher, after they are witnessing some people being allowed to die, the way that they’re being allowed to die.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
Facebook Twitter TAGSBaseballBasketballblanket coveragecfbfootballjack wallaceMLBmlsnbaNFLnoah parkerpodcastsportsTCU Football Fort Worth’s first community fridge program helps serve vulnerable neighborhoods Jack Wallacehttps://www.tcu360.com/author/jack-wallace/ printJack and Noah dive into early NBA trade season, Week 11 of college football and Week 10 NFL recaps. Highlights include the James Harden controversy, TCU’s loss to West Virginia and Deandre Hopkins’ miracle TD against the Bills. Follow us @BlanketCovPod on Twitter and @blanketcoveragepodcast on Instagram for more updates and news! 2021 NFL Mock Draft (Part 1) Special 2020/21 NFL Exit Interviews – NFC West ReddIt Jack Wallacehttps://www.tcu360.com/author/jack-wallace/ Jack Wallacehttps://www.tcu360.com/author/jack-wallace/ Linkedin + posts Jack is a junior journalism major and studio art minor from Atlanta, Georgia. He enjoys everything sports and co-runs the Blanket Coverage podcast as well as photographs for TCU360. Facebook 2020/21 NFL Exit Interviews – NFC East Twitter TCU News Now 4/28/2021 Jack Wallace Previous articleHoroscope: November 18, 2020Next articleAdversity overcome: TCU legend Desmond Bane headed to Grizzlies via 30th pick of 2020 NBA Draft Jack Wallace RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR ReddIt 2021 NFL Mock Draft (Part 1) Special Linkedin Jack Wallacehttps://www.tcu360.com/author/jack-wallace/ 2020/21 NFL Exit Interviews – NFC West
Follow the news on Bolivia News Bolivian journalist hounded after accusing boss of sexual harassment Help by sharing this information BoliviaAmericas News Editor still unable to return to Bolivia after six months in exile January 10, 2007 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Eight journalists injured in clashes during Cochabamba demonstration to go further News News Organisation BoliviaAmericas Receive email alerts November 18, 2016 Find out more June 12, 2020 Find out more February 1, 2018 Find out more RSF_en Voicing growing concern about the safety of Bolivian journalists, Reporters Without Borders called today for the punishment of the policemen and peasants responsible for attacking and injuring eight journalists, three of them seriously, during a violent demonstration on 8 January in the central city of Cochabamba.“The violence in Cochabamba is the latest example of a growing wave of attacks on the Bolivian media – both state and privately-owned – as the country plunges deeper into an institutional crisis that began in the last quarter of 2006,” the press freedom organisation said.“We urge the authorities to investigate these attacks and quickly punish those responsible, otherwise the press will pay dearly for the dangerous political climate,” Reporters Without Borders added. “We reiterate our support for all Bolivian journalists regardless of their political views, and we call on the government and opposition to work together to restore peace in the streets.”The 8 January protest in the city of Cochabamba was staged by peasants from the nearby coca-growing region from which President Evo Morales comes. Its target was the autonomist ambitions of the provincial governor, Manfred Reyes Villa, an enemy of the Morales administration. The violence broke out when the demonstrators tried to storm the governor’s offices.In the ensuing clashes between the coca growers and the police, photographer Jorge Abregó of the news agency Fides was injured in the ear and left side by the explosion of a teargas grenade and by stones that were being thrown. A grenade struck reporter Efraín Muñoz of the Agencia Boliviana de Información (ABI) in the leg. Noe Portugal, a photographer with the regional daily Los Tiempos, was hit in the face, arm and left side by small-calibre bullets.Efraín Gutiérrez of radio La Chinawa was badly beaten by employees of the prefect’s office and by plain-clothes policemen.Coca-growers were responsible for the injuries sustained by three members of a TV crew from the privately-owned channel Univalle Televisión. Reporter Maria Elena Soria and soundman Víctor Cabezas were punched. Cameraman Alfredo Orellana’s camera was snatched from him and, after being knocked to the ground, his head was cut open by a flying stone.Gutiérrez, Cabezas and Orellana were reportedly in a serious condition. Freelance photographer Raúl Guevara sustained minor injuries and his equipment was damaged. Covid-19 emergency laws spell disaster for press freedom
FT Report: Derry City 2 St Pats 2 Pinterest Arranmore progress and potential flagged as population grows Twitter Facebook By News Highland – March 18, 2019 AudioHomepage BannerNews There are calls on the National Transport Authority to urgently review the Letterkenny Town Bus Service.It follows claims locally that while there is a timetable provided for various pick up points in the town; often the bus doesn’t show up despite being scheduled to.Cllr. Gerry McMonagle if there was a more regular service, more people would use it.He also says it’s something he’d like to see Donegal County Council take control of:Audio Playerhttp://www.highlandradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/gerrybusweb.mp300:0000:0000:00Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume. Calls for urgent review of Letterkenny Town Bus Service DL Debate – 24/05/21 Twitter WhatsApp WhatsApp Facebook Google+ Previous articleThree teens die in Tyrone disco incidentNext articleSecond vote on Brexit deal blocked in House of Commons News Highland Derry draw with Pats: Higgins & Thomson Reaction RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR News, Sport and Obituaries on Monday May 24th Pinterest Important message for people attending LUH’s INR clinic Google+
Niyazz/iStockBy KATIE KINDELAN, GMA(WASHINGTON) — Women in the U.S. Army can soon wear nail polish, lipstick and earrings as well as their hair in more natural hairstyles thanks to what the Army calls “major revisions” to its regulations.In addition to relaxed grooming standards, women in the Army who are breastfeeding or pumping will also have the option to wear an undershirt.“We are continuously assessing our policies to identify areas for improvement, then implementing policies that demonstrate our commitment to ensuring all Soldiers feel as though they are valued members of the Army team,” Lt. Gen. Gary Brito, Army deputy chief of staff for personnel, said in a statement Monday announcing the changes. “We know that actions speak louder than words when it comes to inclusivity and equity within our ranks, and we believe that the changes we announced today are one example of policies that put our people first.”The changes, which go into effect Feb. 24, will allow for the “optional wear” of earrings, lipstick and nail colors for women and clear nail polish for men.There will also be no minimum hair length for female soldiers, who will now be allowed to wear multiple hairstyles at once, like braids and twists, wear their hair in a ponytail and have natural-looking highlights.“In an effort to stop hair damage and loss stemming from hairstyles like the bun, the Army approved healthier hairstyle options that are more inclusive of various natural styles,” Sgt. Maj. Mark Anthony Clark, of the Army’s Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, said in a statement.The Army also noted that its revised regulation on hairstyles will “not contain potentially offensive language used to describe several hairstyles … which will be replaced with alternative verbiage.”Women currently make up around 15% of the Army.The Army’s new guidelines come less than one week after the U.S. Air Force also announced similar changes.Starting next month, women in the Air Force will be allowed to wear their hair in longer braids, ponytails and bangs.“In addition to the health concerns we have for our Airmen, not all women have the same hair type, and our hair standards should reflect our diverse force,” Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force JoAnne S. Bass said in a statement. “I am pleased we could make this important change for our women service members.”Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
TheLaw Commission has recommended creating a new offence of corporatemanslaughter. What are the implications for companies? By Gillian HowardTherehave been a number of disasters in recent years, which have provoked demandsfrom Government and the public for the use in law of corporate manslaughter.However, failures to prosecute successfully for this crime have led to aperception among the public that the current law dealing with corporatemanslaughter is inadequate. Suggestionsthat the British Transport Police were considering bringing charges ofcorporate manslaughter after the Hatfield rail disaster against individualmembers of the senior management at Railtrack and Balfour Beatty – the firmthat carried out the maintenance at Hatfield – have failed to materialise.Theperception that there is a serious lacuna in the law has been heightenedbecause the disasters have been followed by inquiries that have found corporatebodies at fault, meriting very serious criticism. In some instances there havebeen successful prosecutions for offences under the Health and Safety at WorkAct 1974. Newproposals from the Home Office and the Law Commission include the Government’sintention to amend Section 1 of the above Health and Safety at Work Act. Thismakes it clear that one of their purposes is to prosecute offences of corporatekilling and to promote a new statute creating a new offence of corporatemanslaughter.CurrentlawThegoverning principle in English law on the criminal liability of companies isthat those who control or manage the affairs of the company are regarded asembodying the company itself. Thus in R v British Steel, 1995, IRLR 310, theCourt of Appeal held that the company could be successfully prosecuted underthe Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 for the unlawful death of a contractordespite its arguments that at “the directing mind” level, the companyhad taken reasonable care to delegate the supervision of the particularoperation to a responsible and competent person.Butbefore a company can be convicted of manslaughter, an individual who can be”identified as the embodiment of the company itself” must first beshown himself to have been guilty of manslaughter. Only if the individual whois the embodiment of the company is found guilty can the company be convicted.Where there is insufficient evidence to convict the individual, any prosecutionof the company must fail. Therecan often be great difficulty in identifying an individual who is theembodiment of the company and who is culpable. The problem becomes greater withlarger companies where overall responsibility for safety matters can beunclear. In such circumstances it may be impossible to identify specificindividuals who may be properly regarded as representing the directing mind ofthe company and who also possess the requisite mental state to be guilty ofman-slaughter. In such circumstances, no criminal liability can be attributedto the company itself. LawCommission proposalsTheLaw Commission, looking into the possible reform of the law on manslaughter,has recommended that:–There should be a special offence of corporate killing, broadly correspondingto the proposed offence of killing by gross carelessness. –The corporate offence should (like the individual offence) be committed onlywhere the corporation’s conduct in causing death fell far below what couldreasonably be expected. –The corporate offence should not (unlike the individual offence) require thatthe risk be obvious or that the defendant be capable of appreciating the risk. –A death should be regarded as having been caused by the conduct of thecorporation if it is caused by a “management failure”, so that theway in which its activities are managed or organised fails to ensure the healthand safety of persons employed in or affected by its activities. Such a failurewill be regarded as a cause of a person’s death even if the immediate cause isthe act or omission of an individual. –Individuals within a company could still be liable for the offences of recklesskilling and killing by gross carelessness. Whowould investigate and prosecute the new offence? TheHome Office view is that the Health and Safety Executive and other prosecutingauthorities such as the police and the Criminal Prosecution Service shouldeach, where appropriate, play their part in investigating and prosecutingcorporate killing charges.Whowould be prosecuted?TheGovernment is still seeking views as to whether it would be appropriate toprosecute individual officers for corporate killing and whether or not theyshould be subject to terms of imprisonment. However, the Government is verykeen to ensure that under any new legislation, individuals who are shown tohave had some influence on or responsibility for the circumstances in which themanagement failure – falling far below what could reasonably be expected – wasthe cause of a person’s death, should at the very least be subject todisqualification from acting in any management role in any undertaking carryingon a business in Great Britain.Twospecific offences are being suggested – that of “reckless killing”and that of “killing by gross carelessness”. The former would involvethe offender being aware that his action involves the risk of causing death andhere there would be a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The latter offencewould apply where the risk would have been obvious to a “reasonableperson” and their conduct fell “far below what reasonably could beexpected”.Thesetwo offences would apply equally to work-related deaths from accidents as wellas from occupational illnesses.Thereis an obvious need for law reform in this area. In a reported case – R vDirector of Public Prosecutions and others ex parte Timothy Jones, 2000 – theDPP decision not to prosecute a company and its managing director was quashedon judicial review. The DPP was ordered by the High Court to reconsider hisdecision because he had ignored relevant considerations such as whether thesystem of using the grab bucket and crane contrary to the manufacturer’sinstructions was “reckless” and whether the system of work whichdecapitated a contractor on his first day at work was “safe”. The DPPwas also found to have wrongly applied a subjective test when consideringwhether a conviction was possible.Andin the Attorney General’s reference No 2/1999, 15 February 2000, the Court ofAppeal Criminal Division was asked to give its opinion on two questions:–Can a defendant be properly convicted of manslaughter by gross negligence inthe absence of evidence as to the defendant’s state of mind? –Can a non-human defendant be convicted of the crime of manslaughter by grossnegligence in the absence of evidence establishing the guilt of an identifiedhuman individual for the same crime?Thesequestions arose out of Mr Justice Scott Baker’s decision concerning theSouthall Rail crash that it is a condition precedent to a conviction formanslaughter by gross negligence for a guilty mind to be proved and that wherea non-human defendant is prosecuted, it may only be convicted via the guilt ofa human being with whom it is identified.TheirLordships answered “No” to both questions and refused to overrule MrJustice Scott Baker’s decision. Their Lordships referred to the LawCommission’s proposed legislation and made it clear that until a new statutoryoffence was created by Parliament, it was not for the courts to overturnestablished precedent.Thismade it clear that the identification concept was paramount and that in eachcase it was essential to identify an employee whose conduct could be held to bethat of the company.Inother words not only must a death or serious injury occur but it has to beestablished that one or more persons within the company knew there was such arisk of death or serious injury and failed to act to prevent such disaster.Finally,in an appeal to the House of Lords against a prosecution for manslaughter – R vAdomako – the House of Lords had to consider whether an anaesthetist shouldhave been convicted of manslaughter where the oxygen supply to a patientundergoing an eye operation was cut off and where he failed to check theconnection until after the resuscitation procedures had been started.Hisappeal was rejected and the House of Lords held that a jury must considerwhether the breach of duty should be characterised as “grossnegligence” and therefore “as a crime”. GillianHoward, Hon FFOM, is an employment lawyer. Prosecutionsunder the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974TheHerald of Free Enterprise disaster 6 March 1987 The jury at the inquest returned verdicts of unlawful killing in187 cases and the Director of Public Prosecutions launched prosecutions againstseven individuals and the company. The case failed because the various acts ofnegligence could not be aggregated and attributed to any individual who was adirecting mind. TheKing’s Cross fire 18 November 1987 which claimed 31 live London Underground was criticised for not guarding against theunpredictability of the fire and for no one person having overallresponsibility. TheClapham rail crash 12 December 1988 that caused 35 deaths and nearly 500injuries British Rail wascriticised for allowing working practices that were “positivelydangerous” and it was said that the errors went much wider and higher inthe organisation than merely to be the responsibility of those working thatday. TheSouthall rail crash 19 September 1997 that resulted in seven deaths and 151injuries In July 1999 Great Western Trains (GWT) pleaded guilty tocontravening Section 3(1) of the 1974 Act in that it failed to ensure that thepublic were not exposed to risks to its health and safety. They received arecord fine for a health and safety offence of £1.5m for what Mr Justice ScottBaker described as “a serious fault of senior management”. The judgehad earlier ruled that a charge of manslaughter could notsucceed because of theneed to identify some person whose gross negligence was that of GWT itself. Dead reckoningOn 1 Apr 2001 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article