Traduction de «critère du pouvoir de direction » (Français → Anglais) :

organizational test

direct consequence test

employer's managerial authority | managerial prerogative

power of management or supervision

direct consequence test

Definition: This block contains a wide variety of disorders that differ in severity and clinical form but that are all attributable to the use of one or more psychoactive substances, which may or may not have been medically prescribed. The third character of the code identifies the substance involved, and the fourth character specifies the clinical state. The codes should be used, as required, for each substance specified, but it should be noted that not all fourth character codes are applicable to all substances. Identification of the psychoactive substance should be based on as many sources of information as possible. These include self-report data, analysis of blood and other body fluids, characteristic physical and psychological symptom ...[+++]s, clinical signs and behaviour, and other evidence such as a drug being in the patient's possession or reports from informed third parties. Many drug users take more than one type of psychoactive substance. The main diagnosis should be classified, whenever possible, according to the substance or class of substances that has caused or contributed most to the presenting clinical syndrome. Other diagnoses should be coded when other psychoactive substances have been taken in intoxicating amounts (common fourth character .0) or to the extent of causing harm (common fourth character .1), dependence (common fourth character .2) or other disorders (common fourth character .3-.9). Only in cases in which patterns of psychoactive substance-taking are chaotic and indiscriminate, or in which the contributions of different psychoactive substances are inextricably mixed, should the diagnosis of disorders resulting from multiple drug use (F19.-) be used. | Modifiers The following fourth-character subdivisions are for use with categories F10-F19: Code Title .0 Acute intoxication A condition that follows the administration of a psychoactive substance resulting in disturbances in level of consciousness, cognition, perception, affect or behaviour, o ...

in-house powers

the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should operate in strict observance of the right to a fair trial and thus comply with the principle of the natural court, which requires that the criteria determining which competent court is to exert jurisdiction are clearly established in advance; as the current formulation of Article 27(4) grants the European Public Prosecutor’s Office excessive discretion in applying the various jurisdiction criteria, those criteria should be rendered binding and a hierarchy should be created between them i ...[+++]n order to ensure foreseeability; in this regard, the rights of the suspect should be taken into account; furthermore, the determination of competence in accordance with those criteria should be subject to judicial review;

(i) the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should operate in strict observance of the right to a fair trial and thus comply with the principle of the natural court, which requires that the criteria determining which competent court is to exert jurisdiction are clearly established in advance; as the current formulation of Article 27(4) grants the European Public Prosecutor’s Office excessive discretion in applying the various jurisdiction criteria, those criteria should be rendered binding and a hierarchy should be created between th ...[+++]em in order to ensure foreseeability; in this regard, the rights of the suspect should be taken into account; furthermore, the determination of competence in accordance with those criteria should be subject to judicial review;

(49) Experience has shown that the criteria set out in Directive 1999/5/EC that conformity assessment bodies have to fulfil to be notified to the Commission are not sufficient to ensure a uniformly high level of performance of notified bodies throughout the Union.

Experience has shown that the criteria set out in Directive 93/15/EEC that conformity assessment bodies have to fulfil to be notified to the Commission are not sufficient to ensure a uniformly high level of performance of notified bodies throughout the Union.