Expert Determination If a Dispute relates to any aspect of the technology underlying the provision of the Goods and/or Services or otherwise relates to a financial technical or other aspect of a technical nature (as the Parties may agree) and the Dispute has not been resolved by discussion or mediation, then either Party may request (which request will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed) by written notice to the other that the Dispute is referred to an Expert for determination. The Expert shall be appointed by agreement in writing between the Parties, but in the event of a failure to agree within ten (10) Working Days, or if the person appointed is unable or unwilling to act, the Expert shall be appointed on the instructions of the relevant professional body. The Expert shall act on the following basis: he/she shall act as an expert and not as an arbitrator and shall act fairly and impartially; the Expert's determination shall (in the absence of a material failure to follow the agreed procedures) be final and binding on the Parties; the Expert shall decide the procedure to be followed in the determination and shall be requested to make his/her determination within thirty (30) Working Days of his appointment or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter and the Parties shall assist and provide the documentation that the Expert requires for the purpose of the determination; any amount payable by one Party to another as a result of the Expert's determination shall be due and payable within twenty (20) Working Days of the Expert's determination being notified to the Parties; the process shall be conducted in private and shall be confidential; and the Expert shall determine how and by whom the costs of the determination, including his/her fees and expenses, are to be paid.
Independent Expert The Parties and the other signatories may, upon written agreement, resort to an independent expert in order to obtain a well-grounded opinion that may lead to the settlement of the dispute or controversy. In case such agreement is signed, arbitration may only be filed after issuance of the expert’s opinion.
Expert Subject to Clause 16.1, where any matter may be referred to an expert pursuant to Clause 11.2 or is required by this Agreement to be referred to an expert then except as otherwise provided for in this Agreement, the matter must be referred for determination by a person:
DISPUTE PROCEDURE (1) Unless otherwise provided in the Council's Constitution or in this Collective Agreement, any dispute within the registered scope of the Council shall be resolved as set out below:
Determination by Independent Firm In the event of any question arising with respect to the adjustments provided for in this Article 4 such question shall be conclusively determined by an independent firm of chartered accountants other than the Auditors, who shall have access to all necessary records of the Corporation, and such determination shall be binding upon the Corporation, the Warrant Agent, all holders and all other persons interested therein.
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURE A major objective of this Agreement is to eliminate lost time and/or production arising out of disputes or grievances. Disputes over any work related or industrial matter should be dealt with as close to its source as possible. Disputes over matters arising from this agreement shall be dealt with according to the following procedure. An employee or the union delegate or site xxxxxxx or Enterprise should initially submit any work related grievance and/or industrial matter to the site foreperson, supervisor or other appropriate site representative of the company or appropriate site union representative as relevant. If the matter remains unresolved the union delegate or site xxxxxxx may then submit the matter to the appropriate senior management person. Where relevant the Enterprise may submit the matter to a union official. If still not resolved the delegate or site xxxxxxx shall refer the matter to an appropriate official of the union, who shall discuss the matter with the nominated representative of the Enterprise. If still not resolved there may be discussions between the state secretary and senior management representative. Whilst the above procedures are being followed work should continue as normal. This procedure is to be followed in good faith and without unreasonable delay by any party. Should the matter remain unresolved and where the issue is within the jurisdiction of the Victorian Building Industry Disputes Board (“the Board”), either of the parties shall refer the dispute at first instance to the Board (which shall deal with the dispute in accordance with VBIA procedures and, where required, determine issues of jurisdiction). The Board’s decision will be accepted by all parties subject to the right of either party to refer the dispute to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission for conciliation and if required arbitration. The Commission’s decision will be accepted by all parties subject to legal rights of appeal. This dispute settlement procedure does not apply to health and safety issues or issues of industry, state or national significance.
Mediator This mediation will be conducted by Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx.
Penalty Determination H&SC section 39619.7 requires CARB to provide information on the basis for the penalties it seeks. This Agreement includes this information, which is also summarized here. The provision of law the penalty is being assessed under and why that provision is most appropriate for that violation. The penalty provision being applied in this case is H&SC section 42402 et seq. because IIT sold, supplied, offered for sale, consumer products for commerce in California in violation of the Consumer Products Regulations (17 CCR section 94507 et seq.). The penalty provisions of H&SC section 42402 et seq. apply to violations of the Consumer Products Regulations because the regulations were adopted under authority of H&SC section 41712, which is in Part 4 of Division 26. The manner in which the penalty amount was determined, including aggravating and mitigating factors and per unit or per vehicle basis for the penalty. H&SC section 42402 et seq. provides strict liability penalties of up to $10,000 per day for violations of the Consumer Product Regulations with each day being a separate violation. In cases like this, involving unintentional violations of the Consumer Products Regulations where the violator cooperates with the investigation, CARB has obtained penalties for selling uncertified charcoal lighter material in California. In this case, the total penalty is $7,500 for selling uncertified charcoal lighter material in California. The penalty in this case was reduced because this was a strict liability first-time violation and IIT made diligent efforts to cooperate with the investigation. To come into compliance, IIT no longer offers Safegel BBQ & Fireplace Lighting Gel Fire Starter for commerce in California. Final penalties were determined based on the unique circumstances of this matter, considered together with the need to remove any economic benefit from noncompliance, the goal of deterring future violations and obtaining swift compliance, the consideration of past penalties in similar negotiated cases, and the potential cost and risk associated with litigating these particular violations. The penalty reflects violations extending over a number of days resulting in quantifiable harm to the environment considered together with the complete circumstances of this case. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger on a per ton basis. The final penalty in this case was based in part on confidential financial information or confidential business information provided by IIT that is not retained by CARB in the ordinary course of business. The penalty in this case was also based on confidential settlement communications between CARB and IIT that CARB does not retain in the ordinary course of business. The penalty also reflects CARB’s assessment of the relative strength of its case against IIT, the desire to avoid the uncertainty, burden and expense of litigation, obtain swift compliance with the law and remove any unfair advantage that IIT may have secured from its actions. Is the penalty being assessed under a provision of law that prohibits the emission of pollution at a specified level, and, if so a quantification of excess emissions, if it is practicable to do so. The Consumer Product Regulations do not prohibit emissions above a specified level, but they do limit the concentration of VOCs in regulated products. In this case, a quantification of the excess emissions attributable to the violations was not practicable.
Arbitration Panel The arbitration panel shall consist of three arbitrators. The arbitrators must be impartial and must be or must have been officers of life insurance and or securities companies other than the parties or their affiliates.
INDEPENDENT PRICE DETERMINATION 6.1 By signing and submitting this bid, the Bidder certifies that the prices in this bid have been arrived at independently, without consultation, communication or agreement, for the purpose of restricting competition, as to any matter relating to such prices with any other Bidder or with any competitor; unless otherwise required by law, the prices which have been quoted in this bid have not been knowingly disclosed by the Bidder prior to bid opening directly or indirectly to any other Bidder or to any competitor; no attempt has been made, or will be made, by the Bidder to induce any person or firm to submit, or not to submit, a bid for the purpose of restricting competition.
