Traduction de «case discussion » (Anglais → Français) :

The ERIC Regulation was also to facilitate the quicker establishment of European research infrastructures by saving time in avoiding the repetition of negotiations, project by project, to analyse and discuss the best legal form for such international research organisations, with related advantages and disadvantages and the time saved in avoiding discussions in each national parliament related to the approval of a needed international agreement in case the framework provided for under the ERIC Regulation would not have existed.

Urges the Council and the Commission to set up human rights subcommittees with all neighbourhood countries; reiterates its call for parliamentarians to be associated with the preparations for meetings of such subcommittees and to be informed of their outcome; is of the view that, while first rounds of meetings, as was the case with Tunisia, might focus on establishing the durability of the subcommittee and fostering trust and confidence among partners, such subcommittees, notably with Morocco now, should move towards a result-oriented phase, with the establishment of concrete benchmarks and indicators of progress, as well as the possib ...[+++]ility of raising individual cases; stresses that discussions on human rights should certainly not be confined to these subcommittees, and highlights the need to include these issues in the political dialogue up to the highest level so as to increase the coherence of the EU's policy in this field and reduce discrepancies in statements on the human rights situation given by both sides to the press; welcomes the Council's statement of 16 October 2007 that discussions concerning a future EU-Libya framework agreement will specifically address, inter alia, cooperation and progress on human rights;

In both cases discussions are on-going with the concerned industry to ensure compliance with consumer law.

The US delegation explained that these constraints do not preclude representatives advising the DOT decision-maker in an active proceeding from discussing with representatives of the Commission such matters as (1) the state of competition in any markets based upon non-confidential data; (2) the impact of existing alliances or other cooperative ventures and the results of previously imposed conditions or other limitations to address competition issues; (3) general approaches to competition analysis or methodology; (4) past cases, including records ...[+++]and decisions; (5) substantive law, policies, and procedures applicable to any cases; (6) issues that might be raised by potential cases that have not been formally initiated, so long as DOT representatives do not ‘prejudge’ the facts or results of such cases; and (7) in active proceedings, what issues have already been raised by the parties and what non-confidential evidence has been provided for the record, again up to the point of potential ‘prejudgment’ of the facts and outcome.

The US delegation explained that these constraints do not preclude representatives advising the DOT decision-maker in an active proceeding from discussing with representatives of the Commission such matters as (1) the state of competition in any markets based upon non-confidential data; (2) the impact of existing alliances or other cooperative ventures and the results of previously imposed conditions or other limitations to address competition issues; (3) general approaches to competition analysis or methodology; (4) past cases, including records ...[+++]and decisions; (5) substantive law, policies, and procedures applicable to any cases; (6) issues that might be raised by potential cases that have not been formally initiated, so long as DOT representatives do not ‘prejudge’ the facts or results of such cases; and (7) in active proceedings, what issues have already been raised by the parties and what non-confidential evidence has been provided for the record, again up to the point of potential ‘prejudgment’ of the facts and outcome.

In some cases, discussions between regulators can best take place in global fora, such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the OECD, the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), the Basle Committee for banking capital standards or the International Accounting Standards Board.