https://antitrustworldwiki.com/antitrustwiki/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Talk%3ABarbados_2002Talk:Barbados 2002 - Revision history2026-04-23T00:14:00ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.43.6https://antitrustworldwiki.com/antitrustwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Barbados_2002&diff=339&oldid=prevJWSchneider: New page: == Barbados 2002 - 3rd Party Initiation == ''Does 36(1) really imply that 3rd parties can bring suits? It deals with appeals, not the original action.'' 36(1) - Where pursuant to sectio...2007-06-26T16:28:24Z<p>New page: == Barbados 2002 - 3rd Party Initiation == ''Does 36(1) really imply that 3rd parties can bring suits? It deals with appeals, not the original action.'' 36(1) - Where pursuant to sectio...</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div><br />
== Barbados 2002 - 3rd Party Initiation ==<br />
<br />
''Does 36(1) really imply that 3rd parties can bring suits? It deals with appeals, not the original action.''<br />
<br />
36(1) - Where pursuant to section 30 of the ''Fair Trading Commission Act'' a notice has been served on a business enterprise, any person who is aggrieved by a finding of the Commission may, within 15 days after the date of receipt of the notice, appeal to a Judge in Chambers.<br />
<br />
--[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 14:59, 25 June 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I say NO. This doesn't seem like the person would be ''initiating'' the original cause of action.<br />
--[[User:Kajrozga|Kajrozga]] 16:26, 25 June 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Hylton: Looks more like 3rd party rights. NOT 3rd party initiation. --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 10:16, 26 June 2007 (EDT)</div>JWSchneider