Traduction de «be the opinion » (Anglais → Français) :

ESC opinion [ EESC opinion | opinion of the Economic and Social Committee | opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee ]

CoR opinion [ opinion of the Committee of the Regions ]

opinion of the Court of Justice (EU) [ opinion of the EC Court of Justice ]

All Russian Centre for Public Opinion Research | All-Russian Centre for Public Opinion and Market Research | All-Russian Centre for the Study of Public Opinion | VCIOM [Abbr.] | VTSIOM [Abbr.]

draft Committee opinion | draft opinion of the European Committee of the Regions | PAC [Abbr.]

action taken on opinions delivered by the Committee | action taken on the Committee's opinions

reservation of opinion in the auditor's report [ reservation in the auditor's report | auditor's reservation | reservation of opinion | reservation | exception ]

The 1989 CIIPS Public Opinion Survey: Security, Arms control and Defence: Public Attitudes in Canada [ The 1989 CIIPS Public Opinion Survey ]

shaping of opinion | forming of the opinion

An Act to give effect to the requirement for clarity as set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Québec Secession Reference

EUROPA - EU law and publications - EUR-Lex - EUR-Lex - 52016IE6805 - EN - Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The transition towards a more sustainable European future — a strategy for 2050’ (own-initiative opinion) // Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The transition towards a more sustainable European future — a strategy for 2050’

EESC Opinion on Completing EMU — The next European legislatureOJ C 451, 16.12.2014, p. 10; EESC opinion on The Community Method for a Democratic and Social EMUOJ C 13, 15.1.2016, p. 33; EESC opinion on Completing EMU: The political pillar,OJ C 332, 8.10.2015, p. 8; EESC opinion on Steps towards completing EMUOJ C 177, 18.5.2016, p. 28

Both of them expressed unequivocal support for Mr. Justice Binnie's conclusions”, is “several” used to mean “more than two but not many” as defined by the Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2 ed) and (i) if so, who other than Justice Charron and Prof. Hogg is included in the class of “eminently qualified individuals” who reviewed this opinion, (ii) if not, in what sense was the word " several" used in this context and to convey what; (hh) was Justice Binnie informed that his opinion would be made public and, if so, was this part of the arrangement the government made with him; (ii) can Justice Charron publicly release her opinion that was re ...[+++]ndered to the government and, if not, why not; (jj) can Professor Hogg publicly release his opinion that was rendered to the government and, if not, why not; (kk) will the government release the opinions of Justice Charron and Prof. Hogg and, if not, why not; (ll) how did the government decide from whom to seek opinions; (mm) how did the government determine whose opinions to release; (nn) other than the Minister of Justice, who in the Department of Justice, in the Prime Minister's Office, and in the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada reviewed the Charron and Hogg opinions; (oo) where are the Charron and Hogg opinions currently stored, who has access to them, and what is the plan for retention; (pp) concerning the Selection Panel that considered Justice Marc Nadon’s candidacy, (i) how were members of the Panel chosen, (ii) what qualifications were sought, (iii) how did each of the members of the Panel meet the qualifications in (ii), (iv) what measures are in place to ensure that Aboriginal candidates are considered in the work of the Panel; (qq) who was the Executive Director of the SCC Selection Committee for this process and how was this person selected; (rr) what protections were in place to ensure that members of the Panel elevated mid-summer to Cabinet were not influenced by their ...

Question No. 437 Hon. Irwin Cotler: With regard to the appointment of Justice Marc Nadon: (a) who did what and when prior to the Selection Panel being convened; (b) who determined the process to be followed with respect to the most recent appointment process to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC); (c) was the process for Justice Wagner designed with the departure of Justice Fish a year later in mind; (d) was the process for Justice Nadon designed with the forthcoming departure of Justice LeBel in mind; (e) in the breakdown of appointment process costs provided in the answer to Q-239, what accounts for the “Acquisition of Machinery and Equipment” cost associated with the appointment of Justice Marc Nadon; (f) was there a ...[+++] competitive bidding process with respect to the goods and services in (a); (g) what accounts for the greater cost of “Legal Services” for the appointment of Justice Marc Nadon relative to the reported costs provided in the answer to Q-239 for other Justices; (h) are the costs for the legal opinions of Justices Binnie and Charron included in the “Legal Services” heading for the appointment process of Justice Marc Nadon reported in the answer to Q-239; (i) if the answer to (f) is no, under what heading are these opinion costs found and, if not reported in the answer to Q-239, where are they reported; (j) were the legal opinions of any Quebec jurists explicitly sought with respect to the eligibility of Justice Marc Nadon and, if so, (i) whose opinions were sought, (ii) on what date, (iii) at what cost; (k) were the legal opinions of any Quebec jurists explicitly sought with respect to the eligibility of a federal judge to assume a Quebec seat on the SCC and, if so, (i) whose opinions were sought, (ii) on what date, (iii) at what cost; (l) how long will the materials relative to Justice Nadon's appointment remain on the website for the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada; (m) when were these material ...