Sentences with phrase «as subsidiary protection»

The Belgian authorities had denied him both refugee status as well as subsidiary protection, finding that there was no «armed conflict» in Guinea, which is a requirement to obtain such protection.

Not exact matches

In February, it acquired part of infrastructure services company Carillion Canada, which filed for bankruptcy protection in January, and in November, it increased its stake in Torstar media company, which holds an investment in The Canadian Press as part of a joint agreement with a subsidiary of the Globe and Mail and the parent company of Montreal's La Presse.

Last year, the company agreed to pay $ 5.15 billion to the Environmental Protection Agency as part of a settlement in a suit against an Anadarko subsidiary called Tronox, Inc..

Concurrent with deCODE's recent petition for bankruptcy protection in the United States, deCODE has entered into and filed with the court an asset purchase agreement with Saga Investments LLC (Saga) to sell its Iceland - based subsidiary as a going concern, including latter's product lines and service businesses.

Assured Guaranty Ltd. operates as a holding company, which through its subsidiaries provides credit protection products to the U.S. and international public finance, and structured finance markets.

Personal information collected by The Climate Reality Project may be stored and processed in the United States or any other country in which we or our affiliates, subsidiaries or service providers maintain facilities, which may include countries that do not require the same level of protection for personal information as the one in which you reside.

The judgment comes in the midst of Europe's biggest migrant crisis since World War II, and affects especially the rights of the beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status — those seekers of international protection that do not qualify as «refugees», — the number of which is currently booming in Europe.

With regard to the question of compatibility of the imposition of a residence condition with Articles 29 and 33 of the Directive, after having found that these Articles in principle require an equal treatment of all beneficiaries of international protection as regards the freedom of movement (Article 33) and a treatment that is equal to nationals of the relevant Member State in the matter of welfare benefits (Article 29), the Court concludes that a residence condition can still be imposed on beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status, if they are not in an objectively comparable situation with beneficiaries of other international protection status or nationals of the Member States as regards the objective pursued by the national law that seems to infringe on Articles 29 and 33 (point 54 of the judgment).

The Court therefore ruled that in case the position of beneficiaries from subsidiary protection can be regarded as being different from third country nationals legally resident in Germany on grounds that are not humanitarian or political or based on international law and who are in receipt of welfare benefits, as these third country nationals could presumably only reside in Germany in case they were able to financially support themselves and may therefore be assumed to be integrated by the time they would be eligible for social security benefits, the residence condition does not infringe on Article 33 of the Qualification Directive.

Therefore, the contentious provision of the Minister's Instructions, obliging the competent authorities to impose a restriction on the place of residence of persons that have been granted the subsidiary protection status in so far as and so long as they receive social security benefits, constitutes a restriction of the freedom of movement as provided for in Article 33 of the Qualifications Directive.

RAND Europe was commissioned by FTI Consulting to prepare a short paper exploring the conflict between the European legal framework for privacy and data protection and the sometimes competing requirements of electronic discovery («e-discovery») imposed on US firms with European subsidiaries by legislation such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

«on standards for the qualification of third - country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted.»

The exclusion of those who have committed serious crimes may support a number of subsidiary rationales: prevent people fleeing from justice; prevent dangerous and particularly undeserving people from entering the host country; preserve the integrity and legitimacy of the refugee protection system, and, hence, the necessary public support for its viability; deter states from exporting criminals by pardoning them or imposing disproportionately lenient sentences while supporting their departure elsewhere as refugees; allow states to reduce the danger to their society from all serious criminality cases taken together, given the difficult task and potential for error when attempting to determine whether criminals from abroad (on whom they have more limited sources of information than on domestic criminals) are no longer dangerous.

The OCC preemption permits national banks and their operating subsidiaries to provide mortgage financing without being subject to the same licensing and other requirements, including predatory - loan protections, as state - chartered lenders.