Примеры использования It was observed that the draft на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
It was observed that the drafting of that provision should be simplified to reflect policy decisions only.
Some transport conventions did have similar provisions,such as the Budapest Convention on the Contract for the Carriage of Goods by Inland Waterway(the CMNI Convention), but it was observed that the draft convention created a new and, some suggested, onerous liability regime for shippers.
In response, it was observed that the draft model provisions were meant to offer a structured procedure for final negotiations.
In response to a question as to what law was meant by the expression"the law applicable to the document" in paragraph 16 of draft article 1, it was observed that the draft convention refrained from determining which law should govern the instrument, a question to which domestic systems of private international law offered conflicting answers.
In response, it was observed that the draft recommendation should include sufficient details to provide guidance to the legislator.
In response to a proposal that there should be a limit to the number of times that a contracting authority had the right to require a bidder to demonstrate again its qualifications, it was observed that the draft model provisions were based on the assumption that the parties would act in good faith and that the consequence of their failure to do so, including failure by the contracting authority, was a matter left for the general procurement regime of the enacting State.
It was observed that the draft convention would serve as a useful basis to allow States to simplify various domestic rules that applied to electronic commerce.
As a further issue, it was observed that the draft Guide did not address any international aspects of the informal process.
It was observed that the draft article implied that the exhaustion of local remedies rule applied only when a State contemplated bringing an international claim.
As to trade receivables, it was observed that the draft Guide adopted the approach of the United Nations Assignment Convention.
It was observed that the draft recommendation was unnecessarily complicated and that a statement of the principle in the chapeau would be sufficient.
In response to that proposal, it was observed that the draft model provision dealt with a sensitive issue of public policy and that its current wording Legislative Guide.
It was observed that the drafting of recommendations(105) and(107) departed from the general formulation of"The insolvency law should…" and should be revised accordingly.
In reply to that proposal it was observed that the draft Model Provisions had been formulated so as to apply to any proceeding that met the requirements of article 2(a), independently of the nature of the debtor or its particular status under national law.
It was observed that the draft recommendations included provisions addressing the protection of secured creditors(recommendations(32) and(33)) and counterparties to contracts with the debtor recommendation 44.
It was observed that the draft articles provisionally adopted by the Commission on first reading had already had an impact on State practice and had recently been referred to by the International Court of Justice in a decision.
In response, it was observed that the draft provision was intended to deal with input errors or single keystroke errors occurring in an electronic communication exchanged with an automated message system of another party.
It was observed that the draft provision would further the application of the convention to other UNCITRAL instruments, whose implementation was particularly favoured in view of their origin, as reflected in the text of draft article 19.
It was observed that the draft Model Provisions did not address the question whether the running of the limitation period for a claim was interrupted when the claimant was unable to commence individual proceedings as a result of article 16(1)a.
In that connection, it was observed that the draft Model Law could meet the three conditions set by the Commission if it had a broad scope and included general principles but not if it had a broad scope and included detailed provisions.
It was observed that the drafting group should consider whether the title of draft article 24 was appropriate, given the agreement in the Working Group that the notice should concern the loss due to the delay, and not the delay itself.
As a general remark, it was observed that the draft Guide needed to clarify whether the power of requesting information from third parties, when provided, was as wide as the one vested in the insolvency representative vis-à-vis the debtor.
It was observed that the draft convention was an important complement to the existing anti-terrorist conventions, providing an effective legal framework for combating and discouraging acts of nuclear terrorism, which posed a real threat to the maintenance of international peace and security.
It was observed that the draft Model Provisions themselves might limit the authorization of the person or body covered by article 5; namely, article 16 restricted the powers that might be exercised abroad by a representative of a non-main proceeding.
It was observed that the draft convention before the Ad Hoc Committee dealt with two issues:the respective rights and obligations of States parties and of United Nations personnel, and the individual criminal responsibility of perpetrators of attacks on United Nations personnel.
It was observed that the draft article, and particularly the phrase"countermeasures by States other than the injured State", which was deemed to be vague and imprecise, would introduce elements akin to"collective sanctions" or"collective intervention" into the regime of State responsibility.
In addition, it was observed that the draft convention aimed to establish a clear, predictable system, and that the assumption that the parties had agreed to a non-negotiable transport document that required surrender, which would be unusual in some jurisdictions, should require an indication of a conscious decision.
In response it was observed that the draft Model Provisions were concerned with judicial cooperation in cross-border insolvencies and that the purpose of paragraph 2(b) was to empower the foreign representative to request measures that might be required in the enacting State in the interest of the foreign proceedings.
As regards paragraph(11), it was observed that the draft text at the end of the paragraph envisaged guidance on the operation of review proceedings in the context of a rejection of an abnormally low tender, but no text was currently included pending a decision of the Working Group as to whether a decision to reject an abnormally low tender would be subject to review.
It was observed that it was the first occasion on which the draft guide was available in its entirety.