Traduction de «sender's correspondent » (Anglais → Français) :

This Directive is also without prejudice to procedures in national law according to which forwarding correspondence may be rejected if the sender does not agree to the correspondence first being submitted to a competent court.

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 for transmitting requests, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery.

24. Rules relating to the establishment of secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities mentioned in paragraph 1 for transmitting requests ð, replies and all written correspondence ï and ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery shall be established in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 40(2)27(2).

Question No. 380 Ms. Elizabeth May: With regard to the recommendation made by Jeremy Wallace, Deputy Director of Climate Change at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), that funding provisionally approved on April 29, 2011, by the DFAIT Planning, Advocacy, and Innovation Office, for the purpose of supporting an art exhibition by Canadian artist Franke James in Eastern Europe, be cancelled based on a determination that, “concerns that the funding proposed would not be consistent with our interests () and would in fact run counter to Canada’s interests more broadly”: (a) what specific criteria and evidence did the government use to determine that Ms. James’ art exhibition would constitute a threat to the interests of Canada; (b) ...[+++] for each correspondence, including e-mails, that relate to this determination, including those between Ministers’ exempt staff and departmental staff at DFAIT, (i) what are its details, (ii) what are the names of the sender and recipients, (iii) on what date was it sent; (c) on what evidence did DFAIT rely in order to justify the redactions, under Sections 20(1)(c), 21(1)(b), and 15(1) of the Access to Information Act, to the correspondence released to Ms. James under her Access to Information Act request on this matter on August 16, 2011; and (d) with regard to the Right to Freedom of Speech enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, on what legal grounds did DFAIT base its decision to withdraw support and revoke Ms. James’ allotted funding?

Question No. 540 Mr. Francis Valeriote: With regard to the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev Ontario) and its partner agencies and all e-mail and any other written correspondence which occurred between January 1, 2008 and October 31, 2010, excluding all matters which are in their nature secret: (a) for each correspondence, including e-mails, between ministers’ exempt staff and departmental staff at FedDev Ontario, (i) what are its contents, (ii) what are the names of the sender and recipients, (iii) on w ...[+++]hat date was it sent; (b) for each correspondence, including e-mails, between ministers’ exempt staff working at FedDev Ontario and departmental staff at FedDev Ontario, (i) what are its contents, (ii) what are the names of the sender and recipients, (iii) on what date was it sent; and (c) for each correspondence, including e-mails, between ministers’ exempt staff working at FedDev Ontario and ministers’ exempt staff working at the National Research Council, the Business Development Bank of Canada, and Industry Canada, (i) what are its contents, (ii) what are the names of the sender and recipients, (iii) on what date was it sent?

4. Rules relating to the establishment of secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities mentioned in paragraph 1 for transmitting requests, replies and all written correspondence and ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery shall be established in accordance with the regulatory procedure referred to in Article 41(2) .