Court of Justice Sample Clauses

Court of Justice. Norway recognises the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Communities over the Centre, as laid down in Article 17 of the Regulation.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Court of Justice. Commission Proposal EP Mandate Council Mandate Draft Agreement technology with potentially higher adverse impacts, or changes its corporate structure via restructuring or mergers or acquisitions. Incorporating due diligence into risk management systems should be understood in line with the relevant international framework to ensure that the due diligence obligations are put in place and being overseen. In order to fulfil this obligation, companies should be allowed to internally organise according to their needs, for example by using existing management systems, setting up a risk management system of the company or creating a human rights and environment officer. Commission Proposal EP Mandate Council Mandate Draft Agreement account, including the extent to which a company may encourage or motivate an adverse impact by another entity, i.e. the degree to which the activity increased the risk of the impact occurring, the extent to which a company could or should have known about the adverse impact or potential for adverse impact, i.e. the degree of foreseeability, and the degree to which any of the company's Commission Proposal EP Mandate Council Mandate Draft Agreement activities actually mitigated the adverse impact or decreased the risk of the impact occurring. The mere existence of a business relationship or activities which create the general conditions in which it is possible for adverse impacts to occur should not in itself constitute a relationship of contribution. The activity in question should substantially increase the risk of adverse impact. Lastly, a company can be directly linked to an impact, where there is a relationship between the adverse
Court of Justice. Norway recognises the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the 1uropean Communities over the Centre, as laid down in Article 17 of the Regulation. Norway shall grant privileges and immunities to the Centre equivalent to those contained in the Protocol on the Privileges and Fmmunities of the 1uropean Communities. By way of derogation from Article 12(2)(a) of the Conditions of employment of other servants of the 1uropean Communities, Norwegian nationals enjoying their full rights as citizens may be engaged under contract by the 1xecutive Director of the Centre. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the second month following the date of receipt of the latter diplomatic note confirming that legal requirements of the respective Contracting Party concerning the entry into force of the Agreement have been fulfilled. 1. This agreement is concluded for an unlimited period. 2. 1ither Contracting Party may denounce this Agreement by a written notification to the other Contracting Party. The Agreement shall cease to be in force twelve months after the date of such notification.
Court of Justice. Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein shall recognise the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union over the Agency, as provided for in Article 24(2) and (4) of the Regulation.
Court of Justice. You hereby agree that in case of violation of the agreement from your part we are to incur irreparable losses. In this case, we will have the right (without any evidence of loss) to receive legal protection. However, the provision of legal protection to us by law does not limit us in obtaining other remedies available in accordance with applicable law.

Related to Court of Justice

  • Antitrust Claims If this Agreement resulted from a competitive solicitation, this section is applicable. Contractor shall assign to the Judicial Council all rights, title, and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under Section 4 of the Xxxxxxx Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 15) or under the Xxxxxxxxxx Act (Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code), arising from purchases of goods, materials, or services by Contractor for sale to the Judicial Council. Such assignment shall be made and become effective at the time the Judicial Council tenders final payment to the Contractor. If the Judicial Council receives, either through judgment or settlement, a monetary recovery for a cause of action assigned under this section, the Contractor shall be entitled to receive reimbursement for actual legal costs incurred and may, upon demand, recover from the Judicial Council any portion of the recovery, including treble damages, attributable to overcharges that were paid by the Contractor but were not paid by the Judicial Council as part of the bid price, less the expenses incurred in obtaining that portion of the recovery. Upon demand in writing by the Contractor, the Judicial Council shall, within one year from such demand, reassign the cause of action assigned under this part if the Contractor has been or may have been injured by the violation of law for which the cause of action arose and (a) the Judicial Council has not been injured thereby, or (b) the Judicial Council declines to file a court action for the cause of action.

  • Antitrust Contractor hereby irrevocably assigns to the State of Connecticut all rights, title and interest in and to all Claims associated with this Contract that Contractor now has or may or will have and that arise under the antitrust laws of the United States, 15 USC Section 1, et seq. and the antitrust laws of the State of Connecticut, Connecticut General Statute § 35-24, et seq., including but not limited to any and all Claims for overcharges. This assignment shall become valid and effective immediately upon the accrual of a Claim without any further action or acknowledgment by the parties.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!