Примери за използване на Contested statement на Английски и техните преводи на Български
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
Furthermore, Mallis and Others argue, the Commission andthe ECB are the‘true authors' of the contested statement.
The domestic courts did not assess whether the contested statements were value judgments and if they were, whether there was a sufficient‘factual basis' for such value judgments”.
The foregoing is reinforced by the adoption of Regulation No 472/2013, even though that regulation is not applicable, ratione temporis, to the contested statement.
The domestic courts did not assess whether the contested statements were value judgments and if they were, whether there was a sufficient‘factual basis' for such value judgments”.
I also note that the Cypriot authorities immediately adopted other national measures allowing the political agreement referred to in the contested statement to be implemented.
However, this is not sufficient to support the view that the contested statement produced binding legal effects with respect to third parties within the meaning of the Court's case-law.
It follows that, as the Euro Group is not a body, office or agency of the Union,the General Court might on that basis examine, in paragraphs 38 to 50 of the orders under appeal, whether the contested statement is imputable to the Commission and the ECB.
The Commission submits that, in their appeals, Mallis and Others argue,without giving any reasons, that the contested statement constituted, in essence, a joint decision of the ECB and the Commission acting‘through the medium of the Euro Group'.
I refer in particular to the passages of the contested statement in which the Euro Group announces that it has come to an agreement with the Cypriot authorities concerning the key elements of the macroeconomic adjustment programme and that it has asked them, together with the Commission, the ECB and the IMF, to finalise an MoU setting out those elements.(48).
In paragraphs 46 to 50 of the orders under appeal, the General Court also rejected the notion that the contested statement could be imputed to the ESM because that body was controlled by the Commission and the ECB.
Whereas Mallis and Others sought the annulment of the Euro Group statement of 25 March 2013 but directed their actions against the Commission and the ECB(as confirmed in their written observations),(12)the General Court first of all examined, in paragraphs 38 to 50 of the orders under appeal, whether the contested statement could be imputed to the Commission and the ECB.
As to the substance, the observations in points 54 to 82 of the present Opinion lead me to conclude that the contested statement cannot be imputed to the Commission or to the ECB and that, in this regard, the General Court did not err in law.
Furthermore, I note that the contested statement was adopted on 25 March 2013, after the Cypriot Parliament had rejected, on 19 March 2013, a draft law imposing a tax on all bank deposits in the Republic of Cyprus, a condition to which the Euro Group had referred in its statement of 16 March 2013, where it expressed the view that the grant of financial assistance to the Republic of Cyprus was, in principle, justified.
Consequently, although the General Court might not apply to the present case the concept of‘mistaken' designation to which it refers in paragraph 36 ofthe orders under appeal(45) in order to analyse whether the contested statement could be imputed to the Commission and the ECB, it could have relied to that end on other case-law of the Court of Justice.(46).
We are of the view that the domestic courts did not clearly assess whether the contested statements were value judgments and, if they were, whether there was a sufficient“factual basis” for them(see, for example, Morice v. France[GC], no. 29369/10,§§ 155-157, ECHR 2015).
The ECB considers that, at all events, Mallis and Others do not put forward a single argument in their appeals to substantiate their allegation that the General Court erred in law in taking the view that the Commission andthe ECB are not the true authors of the contested statement, confining themselves to repeating the arguments rejected by the General Court. 2. Assessment.
Furthermore, we are of the view that the domestic courts did not clearly assess whether the contested statements were value judgments and, if they were, whether there was a sufficient“factual basis” for them(see, for example, Morice v. France[GC], no. 29369/10,§§ 155-157, ECHR 2015).
I am minded, in the interests of thoroughness and with reference to points 54 to 67 of the present Opinion, to take the view, further to my reasoning on whether or not the Euro Group constitutes a body, office or agency of the Union within the meaning of the first paragraphof Article 263 TFEU, that the General Court did not err in law in holding that the contested statement was not capable of producing legal effects with respect to third parties.
Since both the first andthird grounds of appeal specifically seek to contest the General Court's finding that the contested statement cannot be imputed either to the Commission or to the ECB, they should be considered together, on the grounds that they are sufficiently concerned with paragraphs 41 to 50 of the orders under appeal.
Set aside the finding of the General Court that the objection of inadmissibility should be upheld andin particular the finding that‘statements of the Eurogroup cannot be considered to be acts intended to produce legal effects vis-à-vis third parties' and consequently vis-à-vis the appellants, and that by the contested statement the Eurogroup‘gave an account in very general terms of certain measures which were agreed at a political level with the Republic of Cyprus';
(3) A party may not refer to nullity should its behaviour imply that it has not contested the validity of the statement.
(1) The person defined as titular orauthor of the electronic statement cannot contest the authorship regarding the addressee if the statement is signed by an electronic signature when.
The Commission has not contested those statements.
If the claimant contests the statement of the defendant, the order for payment procedure is transferred to ordinary civil proceedings.
A statement by the creditor contesting the claim.
I don't think anyone would dare contest the statement that behind every given success, and also behind every failure, there's of course the obligatory dose of talent, labor and effort, but also the powerful hand of fate.
The rules of the contest prohibit political statements.
The general rule is that each party must set out the facts andpresent the evidence on which their claim is based, or by which they contest the statements and evidence of the opposing party, which means that in Croatian(civil) procedural law the principle of the right to be heard predominates in the collection of facts and presentation of evidence.
By the second plea, the applicant calls in question the adequacy of the statement of reasons for the contested decision.
Second plea in law: flagrant breach of essential procedural requirements by reason of an inadequate statement of reasons for the contested decisions.