Compliance by Developer Sample Clauses

Compliance by Developer. Developer shall have performed, observed and complied with all of the material covenants, agreements, obligations and conditions required by this Agreement to be performed, observed and complied with by it prior to or as of the Closing Date.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Compliance by Developer. Throughout the term of this Agreement, Developer, at Developer's sole cost and expense, shall promptly comply with all applicable Laws and Ordinances. To the extent that Developer's compliance shall require the cooperation and participation of County, County agrees to use its best efforts to cooperate and participate and so long as there is no cost, liability or other exposure to County.

Related to Compliance by Developer

  • Legal Compliance Contractor represents and warrants that it shall secure all notices and comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of any governmental entity in conjunction with the performance of obligations under the Contract. Prior to award and during the Contract term and any renewals thereof, Contractor must establish to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that it meets or exceeds all requirements of the Bid and Contract and any applicable laws, including but not limited to, permits, licensing, and shall provide such proof as required by the Commissioner. Failure to comply or failure to provide proof may constitute grounds for the Commissioner to terminate or suspend the Contract, in whole or in part, or to take any other action deemed necessary by the Commissioner. Contractor also agrees to disclose information and provide affirmations and certifications to comply with Sections 139-j and 139-k of the State Finance Law.

  • General Compliance This Agreement is intended to comply with Section 409A or an exemption thereunder and shall be construed and administered in accordance with Section 409A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, payments provided under this Agreement may only be made upon an event and in a manner that complies with Section 409A or an applicable exemption. Any payments under this Agreement that may be excluded from Section 409A either as separation pay due to an involuntary separation from service or as a short-term deferral shall be excluded from Section 409A to the maximum extent possible. For purposes of Section 409A, each installment payment provided under this Agreement shall be treated as a separate payment. Any payments to be made under this Agreement upon a termination of employment shall only be made upon a “separation from service” under Section 409A. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company makes no representations that the payments and benefits provided under this Agreement comply with Section 409A, and in no event shall the Company be liable for all or any portion of any taxes, penalties, interest, or other expenses that may be incurred by the Executive on account of non-compliance with Section 409A.

  • Law Compliance In providing the SOLID WASTE HANDLING SERVICES required by this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR shall observe and comply with all applicable federal and, state laws, regulations and codes regarding the provision of the SOLID WASTE HANDLING SERVICES described herein, as such may be amended from time to time, including where required by such laws, the funding and maintenance of sufficient closure and post-closure maintenance financial assurances for any landfill operated or utilized by CONTRACTOR for disposal of the SOLID WASTE. Any violation of this Paragraph shall constitute a major breach.

  • Certification Regarding Termination of Contract for Non-Compliance (Tex Gov. Code 552.374)

  • Policy Compliance Violations The Requester and Approved Users acknowledge that the NIH may terminate the DAR, including this Agreement and immediately revoke or suspend access to all controlled-access datasets subject to the NIH GDS Policy at any time if the Requester is found to be no longer in agreement with the principles outlined in the NIH GDS Policy, the terms described in this Agreement, or the Genomic Data User Code of Conduct. The Requester and PI agree to notify the NIH of any violations of the NIH GDS Policy, this Agreement, or the Genomic Data User Code of Conduct data within 24 hours of when the incident is identified. Repeated violations or unresponsiveness to NIH requests may result in further compliance measures affecting the Requester. The Requester and PI agree to notify the appropriate DAC(s) of any unauthorized data sharing, breaches of data security, or inadvertent data releases that may compromise data confidentiality within 24 hours of when the incident is identified. As permitted by law, notifications should include any known information regarding the incident and a general description of the activities or process in place to define and remediate the situation fully. Within 3 business days of the DAC notification(s), the Requester agrees to submit to the DAC(s) a detailed written report including the date and nature of the event, actions taken or to be taken to remediate the issue(s), and plans or processes developed to prevent further problems, including specific information on timelines anticipated for action. The Requester agrees to provide documentation verifying that the remediation plans have been implemented. Repeated violations or unresponsiveness to NIH requests may result in further compliance measures affecting the Requester. All notifications and written reports of data management incidents should be sent to the DAC(s) indicated in the Addendum to this Agreement. NIH, or another entity designated by NIH may, as permitted by law, also investigate any data security incident or policy violation. Approved Users and their associates agree to support such investigations and provide information, within the limits of applicable local, state, tribal, and federal laws and regulations. In addition, Requester and Approved Users agree to work with the NIH to assure that plans and procedures that are developed to address identified problems are mutually acceptable and consistent with applicable law.

  • Notification of Non-Compliance If Seller is unable to comply with the obligations stated in this Section, Seller shall promptly notify Apple, and Apple may take any one or more of the following actions: (i) suspend the transfer of Confidential Data to Seller; (ii) require Seller to cease processing Confidential Data; (iii) demand the secure return or destruction of Confidential Data; and/or (iv) immediately terminate this Agreement.

  • ANTI-BRIBERY COMPLIANCE The Parties hereby acknowledge the importance of combating and preventing bribery and to that end both Parties agree to comply fully with all applicable laws, regulations and sanctions relating to anti-bribery and anti-corruption.

  • OSHA Compliance To the extent applicable to the services to be performed under this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants, that all articles and services furnished under this Agreement meet or exceed the safety standards established and promulgated under the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Law (Public Law 91-596) and its regulations in effect or proposed as of the date of this Agreement.

  • CEQA Compliance The District has complied with all assessment requirements imposed upon it by the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) in connection with the Project, and no further environmental review of the Project is necessary pursuant to CEQA before the construction of the Project may commence.

  • Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.