Examples of using Serious interference in English and their translations into Romanian
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Programming
The SS were running some serious interference with our lives.
It is a serious interference into justice by a politician, likely to affect judicial independence(…) by refusing to address this problem”, shows the CMA report.
World War II brought serious interferences in studying.
This implies a serious interference with private life and the right to the protection of personal data.
Mr. Poirot, his presence is one serious interference in my subjects.
This implies potentially serious interference with private life and the right to the protection of personal data, and thus requires compliance with international and EU data protection law and with national data protection laws implementing EU data protection law.
The provisions thereby create an uncertainty which entails serious interference with the free movement of capital.
This processing implies a serious interference with the fundamental rights to private life and the right to the protection of personal data.
Emphasises that any system of indiscriminate mass surveillance constitutes a serious interference with the fundamental rights of citizens;
The move represents serious interference with the judiciary's work, they warned.
Emphasises that the systems of indiscriminate mass surveillance by intelligence services constitute a serious interference with the fundamental rights of citizens;
It entails a wide-ranging and particularly serious interference with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data, without that interference being limited to what is strictly necessary.
The American Association of Broadcasters appealed to the FCC a similar statement, which states,that the use of the C-band cellular operators will create serious interference with satellite communications, which in turn can lead to disruptions in the distribution of TV signals a large number of local TV networks.
For the exercise of those powers, which may amount to serious interferences with the right to respect private and family life, home and communications, Member States should have in place adequate and effective safeguards against any abuse, for instance, where appropriate prior authorisation from the judicial authorities of a Member State concerned.
Although the retention of data required by the directive may be considered to be appropriate for attaining the objective pursued by it, the wide-ranging and particularly serious interference of the directive with the fundamental rights at issue is not sufficiently circumscribed to ensure that that interference is actually limited to what is strictly necessary.
For the exercise of those powers,which may amount to serious interferences with the right to respect for private and family life, home and communications, Member States should have in place adequate and effective safeguards against any abuse, for instance, where appropriate a requirement to obtain prior authorisation from the judicial authorities of a Member State concerned.
Directive 2006/24, as I have shown above, imposed an obligation to collect and retain data on providers of electronic communications services which, derogating from the principles laid down by Directive 95/46 and Directive 2002/58,constitutes a serious interference with the right to privacy, in particular, while leaving to the Member States the task of actually guaranteeing respect for fundamental rights.
It must therefore be held that Directive 2006/24 entails a wide-ranging and particularly serious interference with those fundamental rights in the legal order of the EU, without such an interference being precisely circumscribed by provisions to ensure that it is actually limited to what is strictly necessary.
It may be inconvenient that the"Sun" lamp when turned on, creates serious interference in the operation of the TV or computer, sometimes even some devices stop working.
The Court stated that the retention of traffic data(and implicitly the directive)constitutes serious interference with the fundamental right to respect for private life enshrined in Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
We must completely condemn this report,which amounts to an unprecedented and serious interference in, and threat to, the sovereignty of Member States, the principle of subsidiarity and the fundamental right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
Directive 2006/24 therefore constitutes,as is clear from the foregoing reasoning, a particularly serious interference with the right to privacy and it is in the light of the requirements resulting from that fundamental right that its validity, and in particular its proportionality, must primarily be examined.
Looks like some serious video interference.