Examples of using Draft paragraphs in English and their translations into Arabic
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Political
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
Draft paragraphs 11(3) and(5).
The Working Group decided to retain those draft paragraphs for consideration at a later stage.
Draft paragraphs 72(c) and(d).
The Working Group agreed that draft paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 should be approved as drafted. .
Draft paragraphs 56(2)(a) and(b).
People also translate
The Working Group decided to retain draft paragraphs 4 and 5 and to remove the square brackets around the text.
Draft paragraphs 3 and 4 were very similar to the corresponding provisions of the Model Law.
Mr. Mitrović(Serbia and Montenegro) said that if draft paragraph 6 were retained,all States would be able to accept draft paragraphs 4, 5 and 6.
Conversely, draft paragraphs 4 and 5 would not apply in those circumstances alone.
There was support for the creation of such a separate provision, as it was said that it would clarify the structure of the chapter andallow for the deletion of draft paragraphs 30(c) and 31(2).
The square brackets around draft paragraphs 14(2) and 17(3)(i) should be deleted and the text maintained; and.
Despite differing views as to the appropriateness of that conclusion,the Working Group had not agreed to limit the scope of draft paragraphs 4 and 5 to arbitration agreements(A/CN.9/571, para. 132).
The discussion of draft paragraphs 49(c),(d) and(e) would be taken up during the Working Group ' s next consideration of draft chapter 10.
Mr. Caprioli(France) expressed support for the deletion of draft paragraph 6 both for the sake of consistency andto ensure the applicability of draft paragraphs 4 and 5 in the absence of an exclusion under draft article 18.
A/CN.9/XXVII/CRP.3 Draft paragraphs for the Guide to Enactment of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Procurement of Goods, Construction and Services.
Mr. Sach(Director of the Programme Planning and Budget Division) said that during the informal consultations on the draft resolution,the Secretariat had been asked to clarify its understanding of the implications of draft paragraphs 3 and 4.
Draft paragraphs for the Guide to Enactment of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Procurement of Goods, Construction and Services(A/CN.9/XXVII/CRP.3).
There was support for the view that the Secretariat should be requested to make adjustments to the text of draft paragraph 11(4)in order to reflect the concerns expressed in the Working Group and to ensure its consistency with draft paragraphs 1 and 2.
Draft paragraphs 28 to 38 dealt with article 14, paragraph 3, which listed the rights of persons against whom criminal charges had been brought.
The difficulty of reaching a consensus on the draft paragraph, it was said, resulted from the fact that draft paragraph 1, and possibly draft paragraphs 2 and 3, did not contain rules specific to the use of electronic means of communications.
The suggestion was made that draft paragraphs 56(1)(a) and(b) could be replaced by the text that appeared in paragraph 11 of A/CN.9/WG. III/WP.50/Rev.1.
The Chairman noted that when the issue raised by Japan had been discussed in the Working Group,the consensus view had been that States which had difficulties with draft paragraphs 4 and 5 could make an opt-out declaration under draft article 18.
It was also indicated that draft paragraphs(b) and(c) regarding the place of receipt and delivery of the goods would not apply to those maritime performing parties who performed duties exclusively on the ship.
Some of the concerns that had been expressed, it was suggested, could be addressed by reformulating the draft paragraph toexpress more clearly the logical relationship between draft paragraphs 2 and 3, which established a sanction of a private law nature.
Alternatively, it was suggested that draft paragraphs 49(b) and(c) could be deleted, and the carrier could be referred to the remedies for undeliverable goods that it had under draft article 51.
The draft paragraphs for use in the outcome document contained dozens of unfair, unbalanced and often untrue allegations about Israel, while failing to address more serious problems elsewhere.
In order to clarify the relationship between draft paragraphs 1 and 2, it was suggested that the phrase" For the purposes of paragraph 1 of this draft article" be added at the beginning of draft paragraph 2.
The Working Group noted that draft paragraphs 2 and 3 reflected traditional rules applied to determine a party ' s place of business that were used, for instance, in article 10 of the United Nations Sales Convention.
It was observed that while draft paragraphs 11(2) and 11(4) both contained default rules for identifying the time and location of receipt and delivery, respectively, the second sentences of those paragraphs differed.
By way of explanation of the differences between draft paragraphs 11(2) and 11(4), it was noted that in port-to-port carriage, goods were seldom delivered all at once, and that there was usually a time period between the actual delivery of the goods to the carrier and their loading.