Traduction de «Attached to a particular case » (Anglais → Français) :

(Return tabled) Question No. 55 Mr. Alex Atamanenko: With respect to the 2007 Canadian Wheat Board barley plebiscite: (a) how much money has the government spent on its campaign for " marketing choice" , from all federal sources since January 26, 2006, in relation to (i) advertising in daily and weekly newspapers, (ii) radio advertisements, (iii) roundtables, (iv) the Task Force on Marketing Choice; (b) how many meetings have taken place since the 2006 federal election between representatives of Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association and other agri-business corporations and government officials where “marketing choice” and the Canad ...[+++]ian Wheat Board was a topic of discussion and (i) on what dates did these meetings take place, (ii) who presided over these meetings, (iii) who was present at these meetings; (c) which marketing, advertising, consulting and professional or independent agencies did the government consult with respect to how to frame the ballot questions for the barley plebiscite; (d) did any of these marketing, advertising, consulting and professional or independent agencies provide the government with written reports on how to frame the ballot questions for the barley plebiscite and, if so, on what dates were they provided; (e) what verbal or written instructions were given to KPMG, the accounting firm hired by the government to conduct the barley plebiscite, regarding the administration processes to be employed for any aspect of the barley plebiscite that KPMG was to be responsible for; (f) what is the government's position in regard to the use of numbered and traceable ballots in official election or plebiscite processes and in what way does this position justify using numbered and traceable ballots in the barley plebiscite; (g) at any time throughout the barley plebiscite, was the government informed or aware (i) that KPMG was contacting households by telephone seeking authorization to destroy certain ballots that had been submitted ...

We think of the significance of the $1.6 billion that will be invested in affordable housing and the fact that in this particular case it is not attached to matching funds and that it also includes aboriginal housing.

See in particular, case 1/81 Pfizer v Eurim-Pharm (1981) ECR 2913, joined cases C-427/93, C-429/93 and C-436/93 Bristol-Myers Squibb and Others (1996) ECR I-3457, case C-379/97 Upjohn (1999) ECR I-6927, case C-443/99 Merck, Sharp Dohme (2002) ECR I-3703 and case C-143/00 Boehringer (2002) ECR I-03759

(32) In particular cases in which agreements which would otherwise benefit from the exemption nevertheless have effects incompatible with Article 81(3), the Commission is empowered to withdraw the benefit of the exemption; this may occur in particular where the buyer has significant market power on the relevant market on which it resells the goods or provides the services or where parallel networks of vertical agreements have similar effects which significantly restrict access to a relevant market or competition thereon; such cumulative effects may for example arise in the case of selective distribution.

(13) In particular cases in which the agreements falling under this Regulation nevertheless have effects incompatible with Article 81(3), the Commission may withdraw the benefit of the block exemption; this may occur in particular where the buyer has significant market power in the relevant market in which it resells the goods or provides the services or where parallel networks of vertical agreements have similar effects which significantly restrict access to a relevant market or competition therein; such cumulative effects may for example arise in the case of selective distribution or non-compete obligations.

Thus, in this particular case, an entire statute - namely the schedule that has been attached to Bill C-15 - depends on whether or not a single clause is passed.