Decision Making Authority Discretion Review Rights
Decision Making Authority Discretion Review Rights Sample Clauses
Related to Decision Making Authority Discretion Review Rights
Decision-Making Authority BMS shall have the sole decision-making authority for the operations and Commercialization strategies and decisions, including funding and resourcing, related to the Commercialization of Products; provided that such decisions are not inconsistent with the express terms and conditions of this Agreement, including BMS’ diligence obligations set forth in Section 5.1.
Decision Making The Joint Development Committee and Joint Commercialization Committee shall each act by unanimous agreement of its members, with each Party having one vote. If the Joint Development Committee or Joint Commercialization Committee, after [* * *] (or such other period as the Parties may otherwise agree) of good faith efforts to reach a unanimous decision on an issue, fails to reach such a unanimous decision, then either Party may refer such issue to the Executive Officers. Such Executive Officers shall meet promptly thereafter and shall negotiate in good faith to resolve the issues. If Executive Officers cannot resolve such issue within [* * *] of referral of such issue to the Executive Officers, the resolution of such issue shall be as follows: (a) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Development Committee, determined by the Developing Party of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product at issue; provided that, notwithstanding the foregoing: (i) if Acceleron is the Developing Party and such issue relates to (x) the approval of an Additional Development Disease, or (y) matters under Section 5.6.3(d), then such issue shall be determined by [* * *]; (ii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the Joint Development Committee’s decision to go forward with a Phase 3 Clinical Trial of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product; provided that [* * *] shall continue to determine any issues that relate to the budget for and the conduct of the [* * *]; and (iii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the occurrence of any [* * *]; and (b) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Commercialization Committee, determined by Celgene. Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of Acceleron, Celgene, the Joint Development Committee or the Joint Commercialization Committee may make any decision inconsistent with the express terms of this Agreement without the prior written consent of each Party.
ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan.
Standard of Review The Parties acknowledge and agree that the standard of review for any avoidance, breach, rejection, termination or other cessation of performance of or changes to any portion of this integrated, non-severable Agreement (as described in Section 22) over which FERC has jurisdiction, whether proposed by Seller, by Buyer, by a non-party of, by FERC acting sua sponte shall be the “public interest” standard of review set forth in United Gas Pipe Line Co. v.
Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.
Authority of the Committee The Committee shall have full authority to interpret and construe the terms of the Plan and this Agreement. The determination of the Committee as to any such matter of interpretation or construction shall be final, binding and conclusive.
Arbitrator Authority The arbitrator shall have the sole and exclusive authority to determine whether a dispute, claim or cause of action is subject to arbitration under this Section and to determine any procedural questions which grow out of such disputes, claims or causes of action and bear on their final disposition.
SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING A. The District shall provide the training and staff development to support accountability/site- based decision-making activities. Teachers shall be given release time to attend these programs. B. Participation on the SAC shall not serve as a basis for the evaluation of any teacher. C. A minimum of three (3) to a maximum of five (5) teachers from each school shall serve on their school’s budget advisory committee formed for the purpose of making recommendations on the school’s general fund budget. Teacher members shall be elected by the faculty. Minutes from such meetings may be requested by the faculty and may be posted on the CTA bulletin board at the school by the Association Representative.
Decision on Review No later than sixty (60) days (forty-five (45) days with respect to a claim for benefits due to Executive being Permanently Disabled) following the receipt of the written application for review, the Claims Administrator or the Appeals Fiduciary, as applicable, shall submit its decision on the review in writing to the claimant involved and to his representative, if any, unless the Claims Administrator or Appeals Fiduciary determines that special circumstances (such as the need to hold a hearing) require an extension of time, to a day no later than one hundred twenty (120) days (ninety (90) days with respect to a claim for benefits due to Executive being Permanently Disabled) after the date of receipt of the written application for review. If the Claims Administrator or Appeals Fiduciary determines that the extension of time is required, the Claims Administrator or Appeals Fiduciary shall furnish to the claimant written notice of the extension before the expiration of the initial sixty (60) day (forty-five (45) days with respect to a claim for benefits due to Executive being Permanently Disabled) period. The extension notice shall indicate the special circumstances requiring an extension of time and the date by which the Claims Administrator or Appeals Fiduciary expects to render its decision on review. In the case of a decision adverse to the claimant, the Claims Administrator or Appeals Fiduciary shall provide to the claimant written notice of the denial. Any such notice of an adverse benefit determination shall be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant (and with respect to a claim for benefits due to Executive being Permanently Disabled, be provided in a culturally and linguistically appropriate manner) and shall include: (1) the specific reason or reasons for the adverse benefit determination; (2) specific references to the pertinent provisions of this Agreement on which the adverse benefit determination is based; (3) a statement that the claimant is entitled to receive, upon request and free of charge, reasonable access to, and copies of, all documents, records, and other information relevant to the claimant’s claim for benefits; (4) a statement of the claimant’s right to bring a civil action under Section 502(a) of ERISA following the adverse benefit determination on review; (5) a statement regarding the availability of other voluntary alternative dispute resolution options; (6) in the case of a claim for benefits due to Executive being Permanently Disabled: (A) a description of any contractual limitations period that applies to the claimant’s right to bring a civil action under Section 502(a) of ERISA, including the calendar date on which the contractual limitations period expires for the claim; (B) a discussion of the decision, including an explanation of the basis for disagreeing with or not following: the views presented by the claimant to the Agreement of health care professionals treating the claimant and vocational professionals who evaluated the claimant, the views of medical or vocational professionals whose advice was obtained on behalf of the Agreement in connection with a claimant’s adverse benefit determination, without regard to whether the advice was relied upon in making the determination, and a disability determination regarding the claimant presented by the claimant to the Agreement made by the Social Security Administration; (C) if the adverse benefit determination is based on a medical necessity or experimental treatment or similar exclusion or limit, either an explanation of the scientific or clinical judgment for the determination, applying the terms of the Agreement to the claimant’s medical circumstances, or a statement that such explanation will be provided free of charge upon request; and (D) the specific internal rules, guidelines, protocols, standards or other similar criteria of the Agreement relied upon in making the adverse determination, or a statement that such rules, guidelines, protocols, standards or other similar criteria do not exist. The Claims Administrator has the discretionary authority to determine all interpretative issues arising under this Agreement and the interpretations of the Claims Administrator shall be final and binding upon Executive or any other party claiming benefits under this Agreement.
Joint Remediation Committee If the Sellers (acting reasonably) determine that the Purchasers have committed a Major Default, then, at the election of the Sellers, within three (3) Business Days of the Sellers providing the Purchasers written notice of such determination, the Sellers and the Purchasers shall establish a joint remediation committee of designated executives from the Sellers and the Purchasers (“Joint Remediation Committee”) consisting of three (3) members of each of the Sellers and the Purchasers. The Joint Remediation Committee shall be responsible for overseeing the development of a mutually agreeable plan in accordance with subsection 3 below to either (i) remediate any breaches giving rise to the Major Default to the extent such breaches can be remediated and/or (ii) prevent similar breaches from recurring in the future (clauses (i) and (ii), a “Corrective Action Plan”). Each member of the Joint Remediation Committee shall have sufficient authority on the part of his or her respective party to make decisions relating to matters reviewed by the Joint Remediation Committee, and shall be approved by the other party (such approval not to be unreasonably delayed, conditioned or withheld). The Joint Remediation Committee shall have access to Purchaser Personnel that are primarily responsible for the area of the business relationship (such as information technology, data security or regulatory) where the breaches giving rise to the Major Default arise (such Purchaser Personnel, collectively, the “Subject Matter Experts”). The Sellers and the Purchasers shall cause their respective members on the Joint Remediation Committee to, and the Purchasers shall cause the Subject Matter Experts to, act in good faith in connection with the development of the Corrective Action Plan.
