Sentences with phrase «international law such»

There are a number of points in the reasoning of the Court that are not particularly convincing and show the Court's unwillingness to reason in terms of international law even if international law such as the Aarhus Convention is at stake.

Experts in international law such as Widney Brown of Amnesty International counseled against a direct apology feeling it would undermine the authority of the court.

Under international law such debts don't have to be paid.

Not exact matches

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such forward - looking statements and that should be considered in evaluating our outlook include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) our ability to continue to grow our business and execute our growth strategy, including the timing, execution, and profitability of new and maturing programs; 2) our ability to perform our obligations under our new and maturing commercial, business aircraft, and military development programs, and the related recurring production; 3) our ability to accurately estimate and manage performance, cost, and revenue under our contracts, including our ability to achieve certain cost reductions with respect to the B787 program; 4) margin pressures and the potential for additional forward losses on new and maturing programs; 5) our ability to accommodate, and the cost of accommodating, announced increases in the build rates of certain aircraft; 6) the effect on aircraft demand and build rates of changing customer preferences for business aircraft, including the effect of global economic conditions on the business aircraft market and expanding conflicts or political unrest in the Middle East or Asia; 7) customer cancellations or deferrals as a result of global economic uncertainty or otherwise; 8) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which we operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; 9) the success and timely execution of key milestones such as the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals, including our ability to obtain in a timely fashion any required regulatory or other third party approvals for the consummation of our announced acquisition of Asco, and customer adherence to their announced schedules; 10) our ability to successfully negotiate, or re-negotiate, future pricing under our supply agreements with Boeing and our other customers; 11) our ability to enter into profitable supply arrangements with additional customers; 12) the ability of all parties to satisfy their performance requirements under existing supply contracts with our two major customers, Boeing and Airbus, and other customers, and the risk of nonpayment by such customers; 13) any adverse impact on Boeing's and Airbus» production of aircraft resulting from cancellations, deferrals, or reduced orders by their customers or from labor disputes, domestic or international hostilities, or acts of terrorism; 14) any adverse impact on the demand for air travel or our operations from the outbreak of diseases or epidemic or pandemic outbreaks; 15) our ability to avoid or recover from cyber-based or other security attacks, information technology failures, or other disruptions; 16) returns on pension plan assets and the impact of future discount rate changes on pension obligations; 17) our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance debt, including our ability to obtain the debt to finance the purchase price for our announced acquisition of Asco on favorable terms or at all; 18) competition from commercial aerospace original equipment manufacturers and other aerostructures suppliers; 19) the effect of governmental laws, such as U.S. export control laws and U.S. and foreign anti-bribery laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the United Kingdom Bribery Act, and environmental laws and agency regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad; 20) the effect of changes in tax law, such as the effect of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the «TCJA») that was enacted on December 22, 2017, and changes to the interpretations of or guidance related thereto, and the Company's ability to accurately calculate and estimate the effect of such changes; 21) any reduction in our credit ratings; 22) our dependence on our suppliers, as well as the cost and availability of raw materials and purchased components; 23) our ability to recruit and retain a critical mass of highly - skilled employees and our relationships with the unions representing many of our employees; 24) spending by the U.S. and other governments on defense; 25) the possibility that our cash flows and our credit facility may not be adequate for our additional capital needs or for payment of interest on, and principal of, our indebtedness; 26) our exposure under our revolving credit facility to higher interest payments should interest rates increase substantially; 27) the effectiveness of any interest rate hedging programs; 28) the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting; 29) the outcome or impact of ongoing or future litigation, claims, and regulatory actions; 30) exposure to potential product liability and warranty claims; 31) our ability to effectively assess, manage and integrate acquisitions that we pursue, including our ability to successfully integrate the Asco business and generate synergies and other cost savings; 32) our ability to consummate our announced acquisition of Asco in a timely matter while avoiding any unexpected costs, charges, expenses, adverse changes to business relationships and other business disruptions for ourselves and Asco as a result of the acquisition; 33) our ability to continue selling certain receivables through our supplier financing program; 34) the risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign current exchange rates, impositions of tariffs or embargoes, compliance with foreign laws, and domestic and foreign government policies; and 35) our ability to complete the proposed accelerated stock repurchase plan, among other things.

There would be little recourse to challenge such a decision under international law — the Paris Agreement has no sanctions for non-compliance.

Franklin Templeton is firmly committed to international efforts to combat money laundering and the funding of terrorist and criminal activities, and as such it makes every effort to remain in full compliance with all applicable anti — money laundering («AML») and anti — terrorist financing («ATF») laws, rules and standards adopted in the jurisdictions in which it does business.

Important factors that may affect the Company's business and operations and that may cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward - looking statements include, but are not limited to, increased competition; the Company's ability to maintain, extend and expand its reputation and brand image; the Company's ability to differentiate its products from other brands; the consolidation of retail customers; the Company's ability to predict, identify and interpret changes in consumer preferences and demand; the Company's ability to drive revenue growth in its key product categories, increase its market share, or add products; an impairment of the carrying value of goodwill or other indefinite - lived intangible assets; volatility in commodity, energy and other input costs; changes in the Company's management team or other key personnel; the Company's inability to realize the anticipated benefits from the Company's cost savings initiatives; changes in relationships with significant customers and suppliers; execution of the Company's international expansion strategy; changes in laws and regulations; legal claims or other regulatory enforcement actions; product recalls or product liability claims; unanticipated business disruptions; failure to successfully integrate the Company; the Company's ability to complete or realize the benefits from potential and completed acquisitions, alliances, divestitures or joint ventures; economic and political conditions in the nations in which the Company operates; the volatility of capital markets; increased pension, labor and people - related expenses; volatility in the market value of all or a portion of the derivatives that the Company uses; exchange rate fluctuations; disruptions in information technology networks and systems; the Company's inability to protect intellectual property rights; impacts of natural events in the locations in which the Company or its customers, suppliers or regulators operate; the Company's indebtedness and ability to pay such indebtedness; the Company's dividend payments on its Series A Preferred Stock; tax law changes or interpretations; pricing actions; and other factors.

Important factors that may affect the Company's business and operations and that may cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward - looking statements include, but are not limited to, operating in a highly competitive industry; changes in the retail landscape or the loss of key retail customers; the Company's ability to maintain, extend and expand its reputation and brand image; the impacts of the Company's international operations; the Company's ability to leverage its brand value; the Company's ability to predict, identify and interpret changes in consumer preferences and demand; the Company's ability to drive revenue growth in its key product categories, increase its market share, or add products; an impairment of the carrying value of goodwill or other indefinite - lived intangible assets; volatility in commodity, energy and other input costs; changes in the Company's management team or other key personnel; the Company's ability to realize the anticipated benefits from its cost savings initiatives; changes in relationships with significant customers and suppliers; the execution of the Company's international expansion strategy; tax law changes or interpretations; legal claims or other regulatory enforcement actions; product recalls or product liability claims; unanticipated business disruptions; the Company's ability to complete or realize the benefits from potential and completed acquisitions, alliances, divestitures or joint ventures; economic and political conditions in the United States and in various other nations in which we operate; the volatility of capital markets; increased pension, labor and people - related expenses; volatility in the market value of all or a portion of the derivatives we use; exchange rate fluctuations; risks associated with information technology and systems, including service interruptions, misappropriation of data or breaches of security; the Company's ability to protect intellectual property rights; impacts of natural events in the locations in which we or the Company's customers, suppliers or regulators operate; the Company's indebtedness and ability to pay such indebtedness; the Company's ownership structure; the impact of future sales of its common stock in the public markets; the Company's ability to continue to pay a regular dividend; changes in laws and regulations; restatements of the Company's consolidated financial statements; and other factors.

Important factors that may affect the Company's business and operations and that may cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward - looking statements include, but are not limited to, increased competition; the Company's ability to maintain, extend and expand its reputation and brand image; the Company's ability to differentiate its products from other brands; the consolidation of retail customers; the Company's ability to predict, identify and interpret changes in consumer preferences and demand; the Company's ability to drive revenue growth in its key product categories, increase its market share or add products; an impairment of the carrying value of goodwill or other indefinite - lived intangible assets; volatility in commodity, energy and other input costs; changes in the Company's management team or other key personnel; the Company's inability to realize the anticipated benefits from the Company's cost savings initiatives; changes in relationships with significant customers and suppliers; execution of the Company's international expansion strategy; changes in laws and regulations; legal claims or other regulatory enforcement actions; product recalls or product liability claims; unanticipated business disruptions; failure to successfully integrate the business and operations of the Company in the expected time frame; the Company's ability to complete or realize the benefits from potential and completed acquisitions, alliances, divestitures or joint ventures; economic and political conditions in the nations in which the Company operates; the volatility of capital markets; increased pension, labor and people - related expenses; volatility in the market value of all or a portion of the derivatives that the Company uses; exchange rate fluctuations; risks associated with information technology and systems, including service interruptions, misappropriation of data or breaches of security; the Company's inability to protect intellectual property rights; impacts of natural events in the locations in which the Company or its customers, suppliers or regulators operate; the Company's indebtedness and ability to pay such indebtedness; tax law changes or interpretations; and other factors.

Under English law, which often applies to such policies involving international trade, because insurance contracts are «of the utmost good faith», the policyholder is required to disclose all «material» facts to the insurance company even if no question is asked by the insurance company.

But even with this restriction, there should be considerable opportunity to argue that international law might inform such matters as: the content of the duty to consult, the significance of the right to culture, the respect that should be accorded to indigenous conceptions of property, and the question of what might constitute an unjustifiable infringement of an aboriginal right or title or a treaty right: see my post on the Supreme Court's Grassy Narrows decision here.

War is a particular demonstration of the power of sin in the world and a defiance of the righteousness of God as revealed in Jesus Christ and him crucified» Yet the conference accepted the idea that criteria exist by which some wars can be regarded as just: to defend international law, or to vindicate «an essential Christian principle» such as the defense of «victims of wanton aggression.»

«The International Association of Genocide Scholars, over 200 members of Congress, and over 70 human rights experts and organizations, spanning the nation's religious and political spectrum, have raised their voices that the treatment of these communities by ISIS meets even the strictest definition of genocide under international law, and must be treated as such,» said Kirsten Evans, executive director of In Defense of ChriInternational Association of Genocide Scholars, over 200 members of Congress, and over 70 human rights experts and organizations, spanning the nation's religious and political spectrum, have raised their voices that the treatment of these communities by ISIS meets even the strictest definition of genocide under international law, and must be treated as such,» said Kirsten Evans, executive director of In Defense of Chriinternational law, and must be treated as such,» said Kirsten Evans, executive director of In Defense of Christians (IDC).

And these were values I had seemingly ignored, yet long ago acquired, from my parents, from groups such as the Boy Scouts, from the American Legion's Boys State, from Sunday School and church, from my schools and colleges, from law school, and from such service organizations as the Chamber of Commerce and Rotary International.

Consistent with the Hoover Report's recommendations that the United States had to reconsider «long - standing American concepts of fair play» and «learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemies,» the shadow government built alliances between U.S. government officials, the Mafia, and international drug cartels; assassinated many thousands of civilians in Southeast Asia; carried out or attempted assassination of foreign leaders; trained death squads and secret police forces; worked to shore up unpopular dictators like the Shah of Iran and the Somoza dictatorship in prerevolutionary Nicaragua; worked to destabilize «unfriendly» governments such as Allende in Chile and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua; cooperated with the Colombian drug cartel to plot the assassination of the former U.S. ambassador to Costa Rica, Lewis Tambs, with the intention of justifying a U.S. invasion of Nicaragua by blaming his death on the Sandinistas; contracted with the Reagan administration and the National Security Council to find ways of circumventing a congressional ban prohibiting aid to the contras, including the trading of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages and money for the contras; illegally shipped weapons from the United States to the contras and allowed returning planes to use the same protected flight paths to transport drugs into the United States; 11 targeted the U.S. people for disinformation campaigns; and helped prepare contingency plans for declaring a form of martial law in the United States that would have formally suspended constitutional freedoms.

The two most vital terms in the Convention — which is now international law, even for countries that have not yet ratified it — are the phrases «with intent to destroy» and «as such.»

In turn, when moral principles are incorporated into such laws as the UN charter and international war - crimes legislation, greater ethical clarity and specificity result.

The calls to have the Pope arrested are the product of a false ideology and such journalism, as well as being irresponsible in terms of public order and impossible under British and international law.

The jury also included experts such as Laura Esquivel, author of the best - seller Like Water for Chocolate, the Basque writer Kirmen Uribe, Cristina Franchini, expert in international law, the rural sociologist Matthew Goldfarb and María Fernanda di Giacobbe, winner of the Basque Culinary World Prize 2016.

Founding Moms grants you the rights set forth herein, subject to the following conditions: (i) you shall not modify, disassemble, reverse engineer or otherwise reduce to human - perceivable form all or any part of the Services; (ii) you agree not to submit or transmit any emails or materials through the Services that contain a virus, worm, Trojan horse or any other harmful component; (iii) you shall not obtain or attempt to obtain any data through any means from the Services, except if we intend to provide or make it available to you; (iv) you shall not copy or imitate part or all of the design, layout, or look - and - feel of the Services or individual sections of it, in any form or media; (v) you are responsible for the accuracy and quality of the data and content that you submit; (vi) you shall not submit content that is offensive, including without limitation, bigotry, racism, discrimination, hatred, or profanity; (vii) you will use commercially reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized access to and / or use of the Services, and to notify Founding Moms promptly of any such unauthorized access and / or use; and / or (viii) you shall not use the Services for any unlawful purpose or to violate any federal, state, international law, code of conduct or other guidelines which may be applicable to the Services provided.

There is no binding mechanism at the global level to hold corporations accountable for violating these measures (although there are instruments such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child that give them weight in international law and are being used to remind governments of their responsibilities, and there have also been some attempts at European Union level to hold corporations to account for activities in third countries, with little success due to lack of satisfactory reporting mechanism).

Much has been achieved in 22 years, such as the adoption of the revised International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 183 and Recommendation 191 on maternity protection in 2000 — enacting stronger maternity entitlements, more country initiatives, and improving national laws and practices.

The answer to that question is that in international law (IL) there is indeed such a right.

@Andy international treaties such as UN charter are part of the legal system of the member nations (in Russia for instance, international treaties have precedence over federal laws except the constitution, in the US AFAIK the treaties have the same weight as federal laws).

The first such panel explored the role of law in the construction of neoliberalism globally through a discussion of changes not only to the content but also to the focus and aim of law in the areas of international property, competition, and investment law.

I would disagree that International law supplies any one clear answer on such thin facts.

Many are members of major research networks in political and legal studies, such as the Institute for Global Law and Policy based at Harvard Law School, and edit prominent sites of scholarly discussion such as the debuting London Review of International Law.

International humanitarian law really has no application outside the context of active conflicts such as the Fort Hood shooting.

Obviously I am asking inspired by the China's actions but I am more interested in the international law and treaties on such cases on on general level.

For context, the Trans - Pacific Partnership (TPP) is an international trade agreement being negotiated between 12 countries including the U.S., and Fast Track, also called the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), is a proposed U.S. law that would allow the President to get an international trade agreement such as TPP ratified by Congress using a simplified procedure (no amendments being allowed, and a time limit on deliberations).

This theory concludes that a regional entity is considered an independent state or a person in international law if and only if it is recognized as such by other sovereign entities.

The implication is that such land or such premises will lose its inviolability under international law with the effect that UK agents are free to enter it.

Such a paradigm of governance is also applicable, affordable and acceptable to various regional and cultural sensibilities while meeting minimal global criteria of human rights, accountability and respect for international law.

No such right exists in international law as it currently stands.

Not only have such negotiations never been held before — nuclear weapons remain the only class of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) not explicitly prohibited by international law — the process itself also marks a turning point in multilateral diplomacy.

Historically, international agreements and frameworks related to humanitarian crises (such as International Humanitarian Law, the Hyogo Framework for Action, the Millennium Development Goals, the SPHERE Project, among others) have not directly mentioned persons with disabilities or have only addressed them as part of the broader category of «vulnerable ginternational agreements and frameworks related to humanitarian crises (such as International Humanitarian Law, the Hyogo Framework for Action, the Millennium Development Goals, the SPHERE Project, among others) have not directly mentioned persons with disabilities or have only addressed them as part of the broader category of «vulnerable gInternational Humanitarian Law, the Hyogo Framework for Action, the Millennium Development Goals, the SPHERE Project, among others) have not directly mentioned persons with disabilities or have only addressed them as part of the broader category of «vulnerable groups.»

At the University of Oxford Alumni Weekend, 17 September 2011, Dr Hugo Slim and Professor Jennifer Welsh, from the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict (ELAC), discussed the concept of the «Responsibility to Protect» or R2P in contemporary international relations, and its role in key cases such as Libya and post-election violence in Kenya.

The Geneva Convention allows them to be «detained or prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action; subject of course to international treaties on justice and human rights such as everyone's right to a fair trial.»

When the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions made inquiries into drone attacks in 2002, and again in 2005, the U.S. responded by claiming that such incidents do not fall within the jurisdiction of the rapporteur, given that the applicable law is the international law of armed conflict.

The rapporteur claimed that such attacks pose a serious challenge to the existing framework of international law, and therefore require the development of new legal mechanisms to regulate use and ensure accountability.

The main purpose of an IIA is to offer foreign investors and their investments protection under international law when they encounter problems in foreign jurisdictions, such as expropriation, discrimination, unfair treatment, losses resulting from conflict, war and strife, or limitations in the cross-border transfer of investment - related funds.

Secondly, if they do regard them as the government of Libya what are the international law implications of such recognition?

Recent events in eastern Ukraine, Palestine, and Syria should remind us that there is such a thing as the International Law of Armed Conflict or the International Humanitarian Law, which aims to limit the effects of conflict and protect civilians against the abhorrent nature and terrors of war.

Sara Payne has been an active campaigner in favour of such laws with News International and other media and charity organisations since her daughter's death.

In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under this Convention to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law.

«Would you accept that the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $ 2 billion was largely due to your failure to ensure: (1) that system was in place to ensure a transparent and accountable spending of budget for military operations in strict accordance with the standards of international law including the UN Convention against Corruption; (2) that any such system was operating in a continuous and effective manner; and (3) that violations of the standards were punished when detected by that system?

It is an assault on UK sovereignty and any such use by a state party is a clear violation of the chemical weapons convention and a breach of international law.

Doing so would be at best unnecessary and at worst give the UK government cover to weaken core rights of people in the UK protected under international law, such as their rights to privacy or family life.

He has also been involved in teaching and in promoting higher education in institutions such as Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Center, Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration, Ghana Police College, North Carolina Central University School of Law, and Central University College, Ghana.

While such a move would require a protracted legal process, complete with appeals and checks against international law, the letter sparked outrage at British plans to «storm» the embassy, prompting many observers to brand it an own goal by the Foreign Office.