Traduction de «Case under observation » (Anglais → Français) :

case under the jurisdiction of countries outside Community territory

keep under observation

be under observation

glass under heat monitoring | observing glass under heat | monitoring glass under heat | observe glass under heat

collect healthcare user data with observation of experts | to gather together healthcare user data under supervision | collect healthcare user data under supervision | collect healthcare user data with observation of medical experts

Definition: Voluntary, repetitive, stereotyped, nonfunctional (and often rhythmic) movements that do not form part of any recognized psychiatric or neurological condition. When such movements occur as symptoms of some other disorder, only the overall disorder should be recorded. The movements that are of a non self-injurious variety include: body-rocking, head-rocking, hair-plucking, hair-twisting, finger-flicking mannerisms, and hand-flapping. Stereotyped self-injurious behaviour includes repetitive head-banging, face-slapping, eye-poking, and biting of hands, lips or other body parts. All the stereotyped movement disorders occur most frequently in association with ment ...[+++]al retardation (when this is the case, both should be recorded). If eye-poking occurs in a child with visual impairment, both should be coded: eye-poking under this category and the visual condition under the appropriate somatic disorder code. | Stereotype/habit disorder

Definition: Disorders characterized by a repetitive and persistent pattern of dissocial, aggressive, or defiant conduct. Such behaviour should amount to major violations of age-appropriate social expectations; it should therefore be more severe than ordinary childish mischief or adolescent rebelliousness and should imply an enduring pattern of behaviour (six months or longer). Features of conduct disorder can also be symptomatic of other psychiatric conditions, in which case the underlying diagnosis should be preferred. Examples of t ...[+++]he behaviours on which the diagnosis is based include excessive levels of fighting or bullying, cruelty to other people or animals, severe destructiveness to property, fire-setting, stealing, repeated lying, truancy from school and running away from home, unusually frequent and severe temper tantrums, and disobedience. Any one of these behaviours, if marked, is sufficient for the diagnosis, but isolated dissocial acts are not.

Until recently, while electoral assistance has always been pursued under the first pillar (EC), electoral observation has been a border line case, falling either under the first or second pillar (CFSP).

In case of EU election observation under CFSP, the legal basis was the specific CFSP Joint Action dealing with EU election observation in a particular country.

36. Acknowledges that in 2013, as part of the Pre-Accession Assistance (PAA), 33 irregularities were reported as fraudulent, involving an amount of EUR 14,4 million, and that those irregularities are mainly related to the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (SAPARD); notes, in addition, that nine fraudulent irregularities involving an amount of EUR 1,2 million were reported under the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA); observes that between 2003 and 2013 under the PAA the recovery rates reached 37,36 % ...[+++]and 29,22 % respectively for irregularity cases and fraudulent cases; calls on the Commission and the IPA beneficiary countries to take action in order to ensure a higher recovery rate under the IPA;

36. Acknowledges that in 2013, as part of the Pre-Accession Assistance (PAA), 33 irregularities were reported as fraudulent, involving an amount of EUR 14,4 million, and that those irregularities are mainly related to the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (SAPARD); notes, in addition, that nine fraudulent irregularities involving an amount of EUR 1,2 million were reported under the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA); observes that between 2003 and 2013 under the PAA the recovery rates reached 37,36 % ...[+++]and 29,22 % respectively for irregularity cases and fraudulent cases; calls on the Commission and the IPA beneficiary countries to take action in order to ensure a higher recovery rate under the IPA;