Traduction de «Avis concernant les requêtes introductives d'instance » (Français → Anglais) :

4. Is of the opinion that the application for such an order should be set for hearing within a reasonable time, so as to give the respondent the right to be heard and to enable the court to re-evaluate the situation and decide accordingly, and that notice should be given to the respondent by the bank and by the court as well; considers that the practical difficulties with regard to service of an attachment order, the authenticity of the order and its speedy service on the bank could be addressed by the use of modern communications technology; takes the view that the costs should in the first instance be borne by the applicant, who coul ...[+++]d finally recover them from the respondent in the event that he succeeds in his court action;

The Council adopted, in particular, the following measures to implement the judgment in Case T-228/02: it called attention to the possibility of contesting the Council decision before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities; it pointed out that it was possible to submit to the Council a request accompanied by supporting documentation for the decision as to inclusion or retention on the list to be examined – such requests are considered as s ...[+++]oon as they are received; it provided all the persons, groups and entities for which this was practically possible with statements of reasons – in other cases the persons, groups and entities were informed by way of a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union; it is carrying out an overall review of the list, at least once every six months, in accordance with the procedures described above, always with due regard to any supplementary information.

The Council adopted, in particular, the following measures to implement the judgment in Case T-228/02: it called attention to the possibility of contesting the Council decision before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities; it pointed out that it was possible to submit to the Council a request accompanied by supporting documentation for the decision as to inclusion or retention on the list to be examined – such requests are considered as s ...[+++]oon as they are received; it provided all the persons, groups and entities for which this was practically possible with statements of reasons – in other cases the persons, groups and entities were informed by way of a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union; it is carrying out an overall review of the list, at least once every six months, in accordance with the procedures described above, always with due regard to any supplementary information.

But the Tribunal may be dealing with a case that is sufficiently straightforward for it to consider, after receiving the application instituting proceedings and the statement of defence, that it is able to proceed to judgment.

On 6 June 2013, two Laval University constitutional law professors, Geneviève Motard and Patrick Taillon, filed a motion for declaratory judgment with the Quebec Superior Court challenging the constitutional validity of Bill C-53.46 They argue that the bill is unconstitutional as it amends the Constitution of Canada on matters related to the Queen, and her representatives the Governor General and Lieutenant Governors, without the consent of all the provincial legislative assemblies allegedly required pursuant to section 41 of the Cons ...[+++]titution Act, 1982.

Geneviève Motard and Patrick Taillon, “Motion to institute proceedings for declaratory judgment,” 6 June 2013, S.C.Q. # 200-17-018455-139.