Examples of using Commentary would in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
She trusted that the commentary would clarify the meaning of the provision.
Another view was that it was superfluous to refer to that prohibition, since it was the subject of specific draft articles;a reference in the commentary would suffice.
The commentary would explain the two different concepts and provide examples.
Mr. Deschamps(Canada) said he trusted that the commentary would contain an explanation of the recommendation.
Commentary would say that‘None of the provisions of these Rules is mandatory.
Mr. Kemper(Germany) said that if the proposed option was adopted, the commentary would take such consequences into account.
The commentary would be updated in the light of experience without changing the rule itself.
Mr. Sollund predicted that any necessary changes to the commentary would not be revolutionary and were unlikely to require modifications to the Manual.
The commentary would then spell out the advantages and disadvantages of the different policy options.
Mr. Riffard(France) suggested placing the recommendations from the Insolvency Guide in the introductory section of the commentary to chapter XI. The commentary would then be followed by the new recommendations.
The earlier version accompanied by commentary would be a more appropriate way to clarify the notion of object and purpose.
Precisely because we agree with the Commission in its cautious approach to this important point,we think that the clarification provided in the commentary would be better reflected by the deletion of paragraph 2 from draft article 9.
The commentary would specify the implications of a consensus and the problems it could generate in the interpretation of treaties.
The Chairperson noted that paragraphs 67 to 69 of the commentary would need to be expanded to reflect the decisions just taken regarding recommendations 61 and 62.
The commentary would describe the approaches to secured transactions that the Working Group had deemed to be feasible and the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to policy issues.
The Working Group also decided to delete paragraph(4) on the understanding that the commentary would explain that the important question of who had the burden of proof was left to other law applicable outside the draft Convention.
The commentary would then explain that some key financial markets and medium-level financing practices were not adequately served by the rule laid down in recommendation 205.
He nevertheless expressed a willingness to remove the reference to the troposphere and stratosphere from the definitionin draft guideline 1, provided that any commentary would further clarify the atmosphere's relationship to outer space.
It is hoped that the commentary would facilitate the consideration of this important subject for eventual action by the General Assembly.
The Chairman assured the representative of France that his views had been recorded and that the commentary would clearly state that the draft convention would not affect any mandatory requirement of domestic law.
The commentary would deal with policy issues that might arise in the case of a paper system where registrants entered a period that exceeded the legally prescribed period.
The second sentence of paragraph 1, which was a slightly modified version of paragraph 3 of the original draft conclusion 9, had been added in order to clarify the principle set forth in the first sentence by distinguishing between subsequent conduct that was relevant to article 31, paragraph 3, andthat which was not. The commentary would explain that the sentence was intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive.
The commentary would clarify that recommendation 214 was intended to deal with substantive matters of enforcement and not to undermine the generally accepted rule that procedural matters were subject to the law of the place where enforcement occurred.
The Working Group also agreed that paragraph 3 should be deleted on the understanding that the commentary would refer to the very limited cases in which the draft convention might apply to purely domestic transactions i.e. to subsequent assignments in a chain of assignments in which a prior assignment was governed by the draft convention.
The commentary would specify that the term"agreement" denoted agreements between the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty or the application of its provisions and that the term"practice" meant any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty.
Furthermore, it was noted that the commentary would explain that it flowed from the concept of ownership that the right of a retention-of-title seller would have priority over an acquisition security right granted by the buyer.
The commentary would refer in more detail to existing rules that in some cases were more favourable than those set out in the draft articles, but in view of its importance for refugee protection, the Drafting Committee had decided to refer to practice in the text of draft article 6.
With regard to recommendation 3, the Commission noted that the commentary would explain the reasons why recommendations in the draft Guide(with the exception of certain recommendations on enforcement) applied to all assignments of receivables, without transforming outright transfers into security rights.
The commentary would explain how the draft Guide should be applied in principle to security rights in intellectual property pending completion of any future project, on the understanding that some recommendations might prove to be inappropriate and that enacting States might need to adjust their legislation.
It was agreed by the Drafting Committee that the commentary would reflect the fact that the term was changed from"appreciable" to"significant" to avoid the ambiguity of the term"appreciable"(which may mean either"capable of being measured" or"significant") and not as a means of seeking to raise the threshold.

