Traduction de «aid failure procedures » (Anglais → Français) :

Radio and/or navigational aid failure procedures for operational air traffic (OAT) flights

COM- failure procedures | communications failure procedures

transponder failure procedures

communications failure procedure

infringement procedure (EU) [ declaration of an EC failure to fulfil an obligation | declaration of an EC failure to take action | EC infringement procedure | EC infringement proceedings ]

complaint to the Commission [ complaint about failure to take action ]

drafting of EU law [ Community legislative process | drafting of Community law | drafting of European Union law | EU legislative procedure | European Union legislative procedure ]

completing transaction procedures for returned vehicles | finish transaction procedures for returned vehicles | carry out transaction procedures for returned vehicles | complete transaction procedures for returned vehicles

Procedures Manual for Design and Review of Short Range Aids to Navigation Systems

EUROPA - EU law and publications - EUR-Lex - EUR-Lex - 62017CA0240 - EN - Case C-240/17: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus — Finland) — E (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Third-country national staying illegally in a Member State — Threat to public order and national security — Directive 2008/115/EC — Article 6(2) — Return decision — Ban on entry to the territory of the Member States — Alert for the purposes of refusing admission to the Schengen Area — Third-country national holding a valid residence permit issued by another Member State — Conv ...[+++]ention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Article 25(2) — Consultation procedure between the Member State issuing the alert and the Member State which issued the residence permit — Time limit — Failure of the Contracting State consulted to adopt a position — Consequences for the enforcement of return decisions and entry ban) // Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus — Finland) — E // (Case C-240/17) - ( // ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Third-country national staying illegally in a Member State - Threat to public order and national security - Directive 2008/115/EC - Article 6(2) - Return decision - Ban on entry to the territory of the Member States - Alert for the purposes of refusing admission to the Schengen Area - Third-country national holding a valid residence permit issued by another Member State - Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement - Article 25(2) - Consultation procedure between the Member State issuing the alert and the Member State which issued the residence permit - Time limit - Failure of the Contracting State consulted to adopt a position - Consequences for the enforcement of return decisions and entry ban))

The main irregularities detected concerned failure to comply with the rules on the eligibility of expenditure (work carried out and paid before approval of the decisions) and failure to comply with the rules on public procurement (no tendering procedure for the award of certain service contracts).

Is a national law compatible with the obligation of a Member State to provide for the effective prosecution of criminal offences by customs officials if that law provides for criminal proceedings brought against customs officials — for participation in a conspiracy to commit corruption offences while performing their professional duties (accepting bribes for non-performance of customs inspections), and for specific bribery offences and concealment of bribes received — to be terminated, without the court having examined the charges brought, under the following conditions: (a) two years have elapsed since the accused was charged; (b) the accused has lodged a request for the pre-trial investigation to be concluded; (c) the court has given th ...[+++]e prosecutor a period of three months to conclude the pre-trial investigation; (d) during that period, the prosecutor has committed ‘infringements of essential procedural requirements’ (failure properly to notify a supplementary charge, failure to disclose the investigation file, contradictory indictment); (e) the court has given the prosecutor a further period of one month to remedy those ‘infringements of essential procedural requirements’; ([f]) the prosecutor has failed to remedy the ‘infringements of essential procedural requirements’ within that time-limit — albeit that the infringements committed within the first three-month period and the failure to remedy them within the subsequent one-month period are attributable both to the prosecutor (failure to remove contradictions in the indictment; failure to take real action for most of those periods) and also to the defence (breach of the duty to cooperate with respect to notification of the charge and inspection of the investigation file due to the hospitalisation of the accused and claims regarding the lawyers’ other professional commitments); ([g]) the accused has acquired a subjective right to the termination of the criminal proceedings on account of the failure to reme ...

The framework therefore ensures that supervisors and resolution authorities have special rules and procedures at their disposal for dealing efficiently with the failure or near-failure of any bank in circumstances of systemic risk.