Traduction de «auteur conjoint de délit civil » (Français → Anglais) :

non-discoverability of leniency applications. By making sure that such applications do not have to be turned over to claimants in those jurisdictions where disclosure requirements exist, this option ensures the confidential nature of the leniency programme the possibility to lessen the civil liability of a leniency applicant. A reduction of the claim against the leniency applicant would concern only the leniency applicant and would leave the civil liability of the other cartel members – who are jointly and severally liable for the ent ...[+++]irety of the loss suffered – unchanged.

3. Considers that the presidential elections in Chechnya made a mockery of democratic consultation while democratic development is a crucial element for the resolution of the conflict; condemns the ongoing violation of fundamental rights, the failure to prosecute the perpetrators of alleged crimes, the terrible living conditions of the civilian population and the problems faced by humanitarian organisations in their efforts to assist the civilian population;

25. Believes that the subsidiary character of state compensation, in relation to other possible sources of compensation to crime victims, should be defined by establishing, in the first place, the offender's criminal and civil liability and, failing this, owing to the offender being unknown or insolvent, a sequence of possible sources of compensation, culminating in state compensation, as a safety net for all citizens; however, this general principle should be applied in a flexible manner in order to prevent secondary victimisation; it would therefore be appropriate to indicate that the victim should exhaust all the other possibilities ...[+++] afforded by other forms of compensation to a reasonable extent before turning to the State;

26. Believes that the subsidiary character of state compensation, in relation to other possible sources of compensation to crime victims, should be defined by establishing, in the first place, the offender’s criminal and civil liability and, failing this, owing to the offender being unknown or insolvent, a sequence of possible sources of compensation, culminating in state compensation, as a safety net for all citizens. However, this general principle should be applied in a flexible manner in order to prevent secondary victimisation. It would therefore be appropriate to indicate that the victim should exhaust all the other possibilities a ...[+++]fforded by other forms of compensation to a reasonable extent before turning to the State;

The focus of the paper is on compensation from the State, the Commission noting that cross-border issues related to compensation from the offender are already covered by other recent or on-going initiatives in the field of judicial civil cooperation.