Introduction Clausole campione

Introduction. This document constitutes a base prospectus pursuant to Article 5, paragraph (4) of Directive 2003/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 as amended from time to time (the "Prospectus Directive") and as implemented into German law by § 6 of the German Securities Prospectus Act (Mertpapierprospehtφesetz − "WpPG") in connection with Regulation (EC) No. 809/2004 of 29 April 2004 as amended from time to time (the "Base Prospectus" or the "Prospectus"). The subject matter of the Base Prospectus is the issuance of or the increase of issued Constant Leverage Certificates (the "Securities") which either will be publicly offered or will be placed in application of an exceptional case pursuant to § 3 paragraph 2 WpPG and at the same time admitted to trading on a regulated market. The Issuer has made an application for approval of the Base Prospectus to the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Buudesaustalt für Fiuauzdieustleistuuφsaufsicht – "BaFin") as competent authority. The BaFin approved the Base Prospectus after completing a review of this document for completeness, including a review of the coherence and comprehensibility of the information provided pursuant to § 13 paragraph 1 sentence 2 WpPG. Following the date of approval of the Base Prospectus, events and changes may occur, which render the information contained in the Base Prospectus incorrect and/or incomplete. The Issuer will publish a supplement to the Base Prospectus in accordance with § 16 WpPG in case of a significant new factor or a material mistake or inaccuracy with respect to the information contained in the Base Prospectus. In order to be able to conduct a public offer and/or a listing of the Securities on a regulated market (within the meaning of Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004) in Italy, the Issuer has applied for the notification of the Base Prospectus into Italy pursuant to §§ 17, 18 WpPG. The Issuer reserves the right to apply for the notification of the Base Prospectus into further member states of the European Economic Area. The Base Prospectus must be read in connection with the information contained in (i) the registration document of the Issuer and the registration document of the Guarantor which are incorporated by reference into the Base Prospectus (see chapter XIII. on page 187 of the Base Prospectus), (ii) the respective final terms of the offer as drawn up in connection with the Securities (t...

Introduction. This manual has been prepared with the scope of supplying all the instructions required for the correct use of the appliance and to maintain it in optimal condition. It also contains important user safety information. The following professional roles are explained in order to define the responsibilities of each:

Introduction. These General Conditions (unless otherwise established pursuant to express written agreement signed between the parties) shall govern the parties’ obligations pursuant to any contractual agreements stipulated between the Customer (Principal of the Shipment) and the Freight Forwarder BOLLORE’ Logistics Italy Spa. The parties therefore acknowledge and accept that any single "Shipping Order" by the Principal, as well as any "Quotation" by Freight Forwarder are strictly subject to the application of these General Terms and Conditions. The Principal therefore expressly accepts that the present General Conditions find full and immediate application to all contractual relationships arising with the Freight Forwarder Bolloré Logistics Italy, as well as all actions and / or claims that could be exercised against this latter.

Introduction. A contract is a binding agreement stipulated between two or more parties, which dictates their rights and their duties, and the penalties each party has to pay in case the contract is not honoured. In the current practice of information technology, contracts are not that different from those legal agreements traditionally enforced in courts of law. Both software and services commit themselves to re- spect some (typically weak, if not “without any expressed or implied warranty”) service level agreement. In the case this is not honoured, the only thing the user can do is to take legal steps against the software vendor or service provider. Since legal disputes may require a lot of time, as well as relevant expenses, such kinds of contracts serve more as an instrument to discourage users, rather than making easier for users to demand their rights. Recent research has then addressed the problem of devising new kinds of contracts, to be exploited for specifying and automatically regulating the interaction among users and service providers. See e.g. [6, 8, 11, 13, 20], to cite a few. A contract subordinates the behaviour promised by a client (e.g. “I will pay for a service X”) to the behaviour promised by a service (e.g. “I will provide you with a service Y”), and vice versa. The crucial problems are then how to formalise the concept of contract, how to understand when a set of contracts gives rise to an agreement among the stipulating parties, and how to actually enforce this agreement in an open, and possibly unreliable, environment. In the Concurrent Constraint Programming (CCP) paradigm [23, 24], concurrent processes commu- nicate through a global constraint store. A process can add a constraint c to the store through the tell c primitive. Dually, the primitive ask c makes a process block until the constraint c is entailed by the store. Very roughly, such primitives may be used to model two basic operations on contracts: a tell c is for publishing the contract c, and an ask c′ is for waiting until one has to fulfill some duty c′. While this may suggest CCP as a good candidate for modelling contract-based interactions, some important features seem to be missing. Consider e.g. a set of parties, each offering her own contract. When some of the contracts at hand give rise to an agreement, all the involved parties accept the contract, and start interacting to accomplish it. A third party (possibly, an “electronic” court of law) may later on join these parties, so ...

Introduction. The deterioration of public finance and the increase in global competition have forced governments and public institutions to obtain “the best value for money” through the purchase of goods, works and services in the form of procurement contracts. Efficient public procurement contracts (henceforth PPCs) are thus emerging as a “core necessity for ... the public’s sector effectiveness in obtain- ing resources for social spending and/or lower taxes” (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2006). These contracts have recently recorded a rapid increase both in number and in value, reaching 16% of GDP in the EU, and around 20% in the United States.1 However, PPCs have both costs and benefits: their benefits (i.e. allocative and productive efficiency) can be quickly erased by the costs (i.e. inefficiency) which often arise from contractual incompleteness and all the issues that ensue therefrom.2 In this paper we specifically address the source of inefficiency which pertains to delays in PPC execution times3 by investigating the optimal penalty design which should provide the right incentive to prevent delays. Indeed, delays in de- livery dates in PPCs may negatively affect all the actors involved, i.e. they may determine direct costs for the procurer, lower firms’ profits (i.e. firms other than the contractor) and reduce consumers’ utility. The typical illustrative example in this regard is provided by a PPC for roadway resurfacing, rehabilitation and restoration: if these activities are undertaken in heavily urbanized areas, they may cause extreme traffic congestion and severe inconvenience to the travelling public and the business community. Thus, delays in the completion of these works prolong the negative impact on users (i.e. a social cost), and also cause overruns in the planned execution costs.4 There is evidence that delays in delivery dates have been particularly large and harmful in the recent Italian experience of PPCs. The data-base compiled by the Italian Authority in charge of controlling PPCs (Autorità per la Vigi- ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ Contratti Pubblici di Lavori, Servizi e Forniture - AVLP ) records all contracts of a value between 150,000 and 15,000,000 euros awarded by munic- 1 Note that between 1995 and 2002 PPCs in the EU underwent a 31% increase in value (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al., 2006: Ch. 1). See also: ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇.▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇_▇▇▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇_▇▇.▇▇▇ 2 The economic and engineering literatures give different explanations for the main issues arising in PPCs. M...

Introduction. Sharia banking has a goal as mandated in Law Number 21 of 2008 concerning Sharia Banking, namely as a financial intermediary institution that is in accordance with sharia principles, supporting the implementation of national development in order to improve justice, togetherness, and equitable distribution of people's welfare (Pasal 2, Pasal 3, ▇▇▇ Pasal 4 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor

Introduction. 1.1. These terms apply to all orders (hereafter known as “Orders”) of products (hereafter known as “Products”) sold by the Seller. 1.2. The special terms contained in each order confirmation issued by the Seller (hereafter, Order Confirmation) and these General Terms represent the entire content of the contract concluded between the parties (hereafter, the Contract) and they exclude and replace any other agreement reached previously between the same, both in writing and verbally. 1.3. Any invalidity of one of these Terms will not automatically invalidate the Contract or the Orders. 1.4. Any change or addition to the Orders, Order Confirmations or General Terms must be agreed by mutual agreement between the Parties (meaning, jointly, the Seller and the Purchaser) in writing. 1.5. Any tolerance by one of the Parties towards the other may never be interpreted as an implicit waiver of the rights deriving from the Contract.

Introduction. Several activities are ongoing in Europe and in particular in Italy around the development of the Generation-IV lead-cooled fast reactor (LFR) [1]. The main concepts which evolved over the years are those of the ELFR (the first-of-a-kind EU reactor) [2], of ▇▇▇▇▇▇ (the EU demonstrator) [3] and of MYRRHA (the EU technology pilot plant) [4]. Indeed, Ansaldo Nuclear, ENEA and the Institute of Nuclear Research of Romania have signed at the end of December 2013 an agreement for the establishment of the Falcon Consortium (Fostering ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Construction), whose objective is to construct ▇▇▇▇▇▇ in Romania. Within that framework, the FRENETIC (Fast REactor NEutronics/Thermal-hydraulICs) code is being developed for the simulation of coupled neutronic/thermal-hydraulic transients in LFRs with the core arranged in hexagonal assemblies (HAs), enclosed in a duct [5]. The code has the objective to provide fast approximate solutions for core design and/or safety analysis, and this thanks to the fact that the 3D problem is solved with a simplified approach. The neutronic (NE) module in FRENETIC solves the multigroup neutron diffusion equations with delayed neutron precursors [6] using a nodal discretisation in space and a quasi-static discretisation in time. The thermal hydraulic (TH) module of FRENETIC solves the 1D (axial) mass momentum and energy conservations laws of the coolant, together with the 1D (axial or radial) heat conduction equation in the fuel pins, in each assembly [7]. The assemblies are then thermally coupled to each other on each horizontal cross section of the core, resulting in a quasi-3D model. The work carried out in 2015 continues the development [5, 8, 9, 10, 11] and validation [12, 13, 14] of this computational tool that first began in the year 2011. The work carried out during this year activity is focused on the following topics: • continuation of the coupled neutronic/thermal-hydraulic validation of the code using data from the sodium-cooled Experimental Breeder Reactor-II of Argonne National Laboratory; • further development of the neutronic module by introducing a new photon transport model and updating the existing decay-heat model.

Introduction. GAM Multicash (the ”Company“, „GAM Multicash“) is established as a „société d'investissement à capital variable“ (SICAV) in accordance with the current version of the law of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg dated August 10, 1915 (”the 1915 Law“), and authorised in Luxembourg as an undertaking for collective investments in transferable securities (UCITS) under Part I of the law dated December 17, 2010 (”the 2010 Law“). The Company has an “umbrella structure”, which allows establishing subfunds (“Subfunds”) that correspond to different investment portfolios and that can be issued in different categories of shares. The Board of Directors of the Company is authorised to issue shares ("Units", "Shares“) without par value in various investment portfolios („Subfunds“) relating to the Subfunds described in the section “Investment objectives and investment policy“, and, as noted in the section ”Description of Shares“, the following share categories ("Share Category") with different characteristics may be issued for each Subfund The price of the Shares is denominated in the same currency of the Subfund in question. As described in the section „Issue and sale of Shares / Application procedure“, a selling fee of up to 2% may be charged in addition to the Issue Price.