Traduction de «article défectueux » (Français → Anglais) :

25. Calls on Member States to follow actively all indications concerning defective products and, inter alia, to test suspect consumer goods;

3.7. The approval authority shall notify its decision in granting a deficiency request in accordance with Article 6(2).

Article 11 of Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products provides that ‘the rights conferred upon the injured person pursuant to this Directive shall be extinguished upon the expiry of a period of 10 years from the date on which the producer put into circulation the actual product which caused the damage, unless the injured person has in the meantime instituted proceedings against the producer’ (OJ 1985 L 210, p.29).

In a similar case against France (C-52/00, judgment of 25 April 2002), the Court of Justice held that the Directive fully harmonises the rules on liability for defective products across the Union, so that national rules which extend strict liability for defective products to persons other than the producer and in cases other than those listed in Article 3 are not permissible.

Mr. Martin (On clause 17 Laws for band purposes) Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Mr. Chairman, as it's Monday morning now into May and we're going into probably the fiftieth hour of our study of this bill, and especially in the clause-by-clause section, endless hours have taken place, it begs the question, what do we hope to achieve when on the weekend we have learned that the future Prime Minister of Canada has no intention of implementing this bill because he essentially agrees with the position we have taken, that this bill is so flawed and so fundamentally wrong that it doesn't even warrant the energy and resources we're putti ...[+++]ng to it around this standing committee?

In condensed form, some of First Nations’ primary criticisms were that the bill: was drafted without consultation or consent following a flawed process; was based on subsection 91(24) of the 1867 Constitution, rather than on a rights-based approach under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982; represented an attack on historical treaties and a threat to the inherent right of self-government under section 35; imposed more bureaucratic control over the lives of First Nations people without resolving long-standing social and economic issues; failed to address urgent needs of First Nations communities in matters such as health, housing ...[+++] and employment, or the concerns of First Nations women; imposed a one-size-fits-all approach with numerous additional requirements for all First Nations communities and no parallel commitment to provide necessary resources or supports; served the interests of government by off-loading federal responsibility; increased the costs of governance for First Nations communities; and failed to provide measures that would enable First Nations communities to develop their economies.