THE UPMC AND DECISION MAKING ABOUT THE PARK Sample Clauses

THE UPMC AND DECISION MAKING ABOUT THE PARK. 5.6.1 The UPMC may provide its advice on all matters arising under section 5.5.4. The UPMC may provide its advice in writing or in any appropriate way but any advice provided to the Minister shall be in writing.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to THE UPMC AND DECISION MAKING ABOUT THE PARK

  • Shared Decision Making 33-1 Purpose The purpose of a shared decision making program is to create an atmosphere in which decision making is a collegial, shared, process that fosters an exchange of ideas and information necessary for effective professional practice and for improved student performance. The Association and District agree to continue pursuing jointly the implementation of legitimately recognized school councils as a foundation of a shared decision-making program. All provisions of this Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect throughout the process.

  • Initial Decision Maker The Architect will serve as the Initial Decision Maker pursuant to Article 15 of AIA Document A201–2017, unless the parties appoint below another individual, not a party to this Agreement, to serve as the Initial Decision Maker. (If the parties mutually agree, insert the name, address and other contact information of the Initial Decision Maker, if other than the Architect.) « » « » « » « »

  • Decision Making All decisions of the JCC require unanimous agreement of the Parties, with each Party having one (1) vote on all matters presented to the JCC for resolution or decision. The members of the JCC will attempt in good faith to reach consensus on all matters before the JCC. In the event that the JCC cannot, after such good-faith efforts, reach agreement on a matter within the jurisdiction of the JCC, including any adoption, amendment or update to a Co-Promotion Plan within […***…], the issue shall be elevated to a Executive Officer of each of Ambit and Astellas, to seek in good faith to reach agreement on the issue. Solely in the case of a dispute regarding the Direct Marketing/Promotion Expenses or the Indirect Marketing Expenses proposed to be included in the Co-Promotion Plan budget (or any proposed amendment or update thereto) (in each case, a “Proposed Expense Dispute”), the Parties shall exchange written proposals regarding the portion of the budget in dispute in advance of elevating such dispute to the Executive Officers. In the event such executives cannot resolve the issue after good-faith efforts within […***…], then (a) if the dispute is a Proposed Expense Dispute, either Party shall have the right to cause the Dispute to be resolved by expedited arbitration pursuant to Exhibit E, and (b) if the dispute concerns any other issue the issue shall be decided by Astellas, in its reasonable discretion but subject to Astellas’s obligation to use Commercially Reasonable Efforts as set forth in Section 3.6.1 and taking into account the legitimate business issues of Ambit with respect to the issue. Astellas shall provide Ambit with a Decision Notice with respect to such decision, which decision shall be final and binding on the Parties. For clarity, in the event of a dispute concerning the Co-Promotion Plan budget which is resolved by expedited arbitration, Astellas may, but shall not be required to, perform the activities contemplated in its proposed Co-Promotion Plan budget, but the Direct Marketing/Promotion Expenses and Indirect Marketing Expenses incurred by Astellas during the Calendar Year covered by the disputed budget shall only be included in the calculation of the Annual U.S. Profit/Loss up to the amount of the Arbitrator-Determined Marketing Budget (as defined in Exhibit E), and such additional amounts shall be borne solely by Astellas. ***Confidential Treatment Requested CONFIDENTIAL 4. FEES, MILESTONES, ROYALTIES AND PROFIT SHARE

  • Cost Responsibility for Interconnection Facilities and Distribution Upgrades 4.1 Interconnection Facilities 4.2 Distribution Upgrades

  • WASHINGTON’S STATEWIDE PAYEE DESK Contractor represents and warrants that Contractor is registered with Washington’s Statewide Payee Desk, which registration is a condition to payment.

  • Required Confidentiality Claim Form This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. TIPS provides the required TIPS Confidentiality Claim Form in the "Attachments" section of this solicitation. Vendor must execute this form by either signing and waiving any confidentiality claim, or designating portions of Vendor's proposal confidential. If Vendor considers any portion of Vendor's proposal to be confidential and not subject to public disclosure pursuant to Chapter 552 Texas Gov’t Code or other law(s) and orders, Vendor must have identified the claimed confidential materials through proper execution of the Confidentiality Claim Form. If TIPS receives a public information act or similar request, any responsive documentation not deemed confidential by you in this manner will be automatically released. For Vendor documents deemed confidential by you in this manner, TIPS will follow procedures of controlling statute(s) regarding any claim of confidentiality and shall not be liable for any release of information required by law, including Attorney General determination and opinion. Notwithstanding any other Vendor designation of Vendor's proposal as confidential or proprietary, Vendor’s submission of this proposal constitutes Vendor’s agreement that proper execution of the required TIPS Confidentiality Claim Form is the only way to assert any portion of Vendor's proposal as confidential.

  • Search, Enquiry, Investigation, Examination And Verification a. The Property is sold on an “as is where is basis” subject to all the necessary inspection, search (including but not limited to the status of title), enquiry (including but not limited to the terms of consent to transfer and/or assignment and outstanding charges), investigation, examination and verification of which the Purchaser is already advised to conduct prior to the auction and which the Purchaser warrants to the Assignee has been conducted by the Purchaser’s independent legal advisors at the time of execution of the Memorandum.

  • Limitation on Out-of-State Litigation - Texas Business and Commerce Code § 272 This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. Texas Business and Commerce Code § 272 prohibits a construction contract, or an agreement collateral to or affecting the construction contract, from containing a provision making the contract or agreement, or any conflict arising under the contract or agreement, subject to another state’s law, litigation in the courts of another state, or arbitration in another state. If included in Texas construction contracts, such provisions are voidable by a party obligated by the contract or agreement to perform the work. By submission of this proposal, Vendor acknowledges this law and if Vendor enters into a construction contract with a Texas TIPS Member under this procurement, Vendor certifies compliance.

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