Примеры использования Support of that suggestion на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
In support of that suggestion, doubt was expressed as to whether the draft convention provided for any reservations.
Mr. Chan(Singapore) said that in order to achieve a balance in the record, his delegation proposed that in paragraph 8 of A/CN.9/XXXV/CRP.1/Add.5, the first sentence should be amended and split in two, as follows:"In support of that suggestion, it was stated that the laws of a number of countries expressly provide for this.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that the laws of a number of countries expressly provided for that practice.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that a complete listing of all restrictions might be impossible to include in a certificate.
In support of that suggestion, it was said that also the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules themselves contained non-derogable provisions.
It was said in support of that suggestion that paragraph(3) reflected a key provision contained in article 1(3) of the UNCITRAL Conciliation Rules.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that a reference to“commercially reasonable measures” would reflect what was practicable under the particular circumstances.
In support of that suggestion, it was said that such an approach would result in an acceptable general statement based on party autonomy and the applicable law.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that the algorithms were essential for ensuring identification of the signer and integrity of the data message.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that the inclusion would provide the necessary guidance to the arbitral tribunal on its powers with respect to hearings.
It was said in support of that suggestion that simplicity and workability was advantageous, in particular given the direct implications of the convention on relevant arbitrations.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that introducing a reference to“records” in the Uniform Rules might create problems of interpretation of article 2(a)of the Model Law.
In support of that suggestion, it was said that, at the time when enforcement of an interim measure was sought, a court might not be able to fully determine the subject matter of the dispute.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that such an approach would be consistent with the proposed amendment to draft article 17bis(see para. 164), under which a debtor could continue making payments to the assignor.
In support of that suggestion, it was observed that such an approach would be similar to the approach taken in option A, according to which each amendment notice could be for the period of time specified in the law.
In support of that suggestion, it was pointed out that in the field of factoring, for instance, recovery under assigned receivables was not limited to collection of cash proceeds, but extended to recovery of goods.
In support of that suggestion, it was observed that the secured creditor of the owner or licensor deserved that treatment, since without that start-up financing no asset or value would be created for other financiers to take a security right in.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that there were two sets of conflicting interests that might arise in the event of the insolvency of a licensor that had granted a security right over a licensed intellectual property right.
In support of that suggestion, it was observed that, while paragraph(1) might appear as stating the obvious, paragraph(2) introduced the very important principle that the core obligations of the contract could not be taken away through exemption clauses.
In support of that suggestion, it was pointed out that the time of the contract assignment was a fact, rather than a matter for determination by the parties, in contrast to the effects of the assignment, which could be freely determined by the parties, subject to the rights of third parties.
In support of that suggestion, the existence of a well-accepted definition of the concept was recalled, which would include all persons to whom services or funds were owed, and the benefits of avoiding dealing with different classes of stakeholder were highlighted.
In support of that suggestion, it was observed that, although branch offices had no separate legal personality from that of the head office, they were subject to the financial services regulations of the country in which they were located in respect of their activities in that country.
In support of that suggestion it was stated that some international standards and guidelines on electronic certification and authentication, such as the Uniform International Authentication and Certification Practice Guidelines being prepared by the International Chamber of Commerce, contemplated such a duty.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that any reference to“licensed certification authorities” in the Uniform Rules might be interpreted as encouraging enacting States to establish licensing schemes, which might run counter to the“dual approach” adopted by the Working Group at its previous session see A/CN.9/437, para. 69.
In support of that suggestion it was stated that the question of liability was essentially a question of the warranties provided by the certification authority, which was best left for the contracting partners to regulate, or should be determined in accordance with the national law that applied to their contractual relationship.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that making reference to bilateral or multilateral international agreements would make it clear that the draft uniform rules did not affect the international obligations that States might assume, for instance within the framework of regional agreements on economic integration or cooperation.
In support of that suggestion, it was observed that, under such an approach, the law applicable to the enforcement of a security right in a tangible asset would be the law of the location of the asset except in the case of tangible assets subject to a specialized registration system; see the second sentence of recommendation 202.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that the suggested revision of draft article 14 would clarify that the right of the parties to resort to arbitral or judicial proceedings was an exception to the duty of arbitral or judicial tribunals to stay any proceeding in the case of a waiver by the parties of the right to initiate arbitral or judicial proceedings.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that such an approach would provide the desirable degree of certainty, since the same law would apply irrespective of the country in which the assignor's creditors might obtain a court judgement ordering the attachment of the assigned receivables or of the country in which enforcement of the claims of the assignor's creditors might be sought.
In support of that suggestion, it was stated that, according to an understanding widely shared at the Working Group, it had always been assumed that the draft convention did not govern matters related to family law and the law of succession, and that the draft convention's focus on trade transactions was evidenced by the requirement, in draft article 1, that the parties had to have their"places of business" in contracting States.