Sentences with phrase «accept accession»

The Council was perfectly happy with Member States deciding on accession on their own, and rejected the view that a decision to accept accession fell within EU exclusive competence.

The Court, first, held that the decision to accept accession amounted to an agreement in the sense of article 218 (11) TFEU as such a decision together with the application of the third State amounted to the «convergence of intent» of two States to apply the Convention vis - a-vis each other (paras 38 - 42).

That being said, even if one must go through Brussels first, it might be still possible that the Council decides that Member States may individually accept accession.

The question here was whether de decision to accept accession of a third State may affect the Brussels IIa Regulation or alter its scope.

As a consequence, the decision to accept accession of a third state can only be taken after the Council has taken a decision on the matter, and Member States can no longer decide that third countries can accede and establish bilateral obligations on their own.

Not exact matches

Accordingly, the Maharaja signed an instrument of accession on 26 October 1947, which was accepted by the Governor General the next day.

While the opinion does not discuss any other international organizations, it is made plain that accession will depend on the rules of each organization: some, like the IMF and World Bank, have in fact accepted that a state may directly succeed to membership if they are satisfied that the necessary requirements are fulfilled (see «State Succession in Treaties» Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law); the WTO, on the other hand, has a complicated process which includes lengthy bilateral market access negotiations and a vote by the WTO Members on the terms of the accession package (a process navigated most recently by Tajikistan who will become the 159th Member on 2 March).

a) for each State or Regional Economic Integration Organisation subsequently ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to it, on the first day of the month following the expiration of three months after the deposit of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession; b) for a territorial unit to which this Convention has been extended in accordance with Article 28, paragraph 1, on the first day of the month following the expiration of three months after the notification of the declaration referred to in that Article.

1) we agree to disagree:) 2) supremacy of EU law for the EU system is the equivalent of the hard core of constitutional values that some national Courts defend against EU (and ECHR)- it is not a matter of «legitimacy» or «patriotism» but of using a «lower rank» instrument (accession treaty) to interfere with a treaty rule: the identical issue is for States who have a «rigid» constitution (alike the Treaty binds the CIEU): the accession treaty to ECHR or EU has a «lower rank» than the Constitution itself, so that the national Constitutional Court can not accept it can derogate to a higher ranking rule - usually they will find a way to reconcile the «construction» of the two set of rules, but if they are requested of an opinion on the point of principle, they will always say that in the very end, if all other paths have been explored to avoid the conflict, eventually it is the Constitution and neither ECHR nor EUwhich prevails.

The Department of Foreign Affairs Trade and Development said in a statement Canada has not yet decided on whether to accept Guatemala's 2002 accession to the convention or whether or not to sign the 1996 Hague Convention on Child Protection, but wouldn't go into specifics.