Sentences with phrase «law disclosure purposes»

These fees are finance charges for federal law disclosure purposes (even though not included in any APR calculation).

This fee is a finance charge for federal law disclosure purposes (even though not included in any APR calculation).

Not exact matches

When it comes to the obstruction portion of the investigation, Mueller is said to be focused on three main episodes: Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey last May; the drafting of a misleading statement about the purpose of a June 2016 meeting between Don Jr., Trump's son - in - law Jared Kushner and a group of Russians at Trump Tower; and the disclosure that Trump considered firing Mueller last June.

«Washington law treats trade associations contributing their own funds as single entities for disclosure purposes,» it says.

Under California law, California Residents who have an established business relationship with Startup Grind may choose to opt out of Startup Grind's disclosure of personal information about them to third parties for direct marketing purposes.

Beginning on January 1, 2005, California law permits customers of Phoenix Media Corporation who are California residents to request certain information regarding Phoenix Media Corporation's disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

Except where your consent has been provided, Accolade Wines will only use personal information for the primary purpose for which we collected it (or a purpose related to it), where required or permitted by law, or where you have consented to such use or disclosure.

In real terms, these rules which exist in virtually every jurisdiction, include laws and regulations which forbid the unauthorized use of state resources for political purposes, contributions from dubious sources, violation of campaign funding limits as prescribed by enabling laws, the use of money to influence voters and election outcomes, non-disclosure of campaign spending, abuse of media, broadcasting and political advertising rules, and rules on declaration of assets, academic qualifications, health and other disclosures and internal party guidelines and rules.

The FOIL request from the Elections panel, however, complies with the state's law for disclosure of voter rolls as long as the information is used for election - related purposes.

The purpose of financial disclosure reports is to provide assurance that reporting individuals are in compliance with applicable ethics laws and regulations.

CIPSEA is contained in Public Law 107 - 347, Title V. and includes fines and penalties for unauthorized disclosures of information collected under a pledge of confidentiality where the information is designated exclusively for statistical purposes.

The purpose of this disclosure is to set forth the terms governing the electronic fund transfer services offered by BancorpSouth Bank («we», «us», «our») to consumers («you», «your») on accounts established primarily for personal, family, or household purposes for transactions which are governed by Regulation E and to make certain disclosures relative to these services which are required by law.

Experian does not and will not disclose the personal information you provide to us in connection with this service to any third parties for any purpose unless required by law or for internal audit purposes without specifically indicating such disclosure to you and informing you of your choice to prohibit such disclosure.

The purpose behind these guidelines is to promote (i) honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships; (ii) full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that the Trust files with, or submits to, the SEC and in other public communications made by the Funds; (iii) compliance with applicable governmental laws, rule and regulations; (iv) the prompt internal reporting of violations of the Trust Code to an appropriate person or persons identified in the Trust Code; and (v) accountability for adherence to the Trust Code.

The prohibition does not apply if: (1) the employer is a bank or financial institution; (2) the report is required by law; or (3) the credit information is substantially related to the employee's current job or a potential job and the employer provides a written disclosure to the employee explaining its bona fide purpose for requesting or using the information in the credit report.

Under the California «Shine The Light» law, California residents may opt - out of the disclosure of personal information to third parties for direct marketing purposes (as those concepts are defined in that law) However, we do not currently engage in the type of sharing covered by that law.

Under California law, our users that are California residents may request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or to an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual; [the law enforcement exemption]

If you are a California resident and have provided personal information to a business without an Opt - Out Policy, you may be entitled by law to request certain information regarding disclosures of personal information made by such business to third parties for the third parties» direct marketing purposes during the immediately preceding calendar year («Disclosure Request»).

Jeff is not «bemused» by disclosure of personal information against his express wishes, particularly when, in his view, the disclosure of his personal information lacked any legitimate journalistic purpose and when there are reasonable grounds to suspect that personal information had been leaked to the Guardian by the police, that the police violated UK law in disclosing the personal information to the Guardian and that the Guardian knew that the police had violated UK law in giving the information to Leigh...»

Any exemption from reporting payments to governments that object to such disclosure would defeat a primary purpose of the law.»

It held that Bahamian law did not apply; that solicitors» firms are not exempt from the scope of the DPA; that there was no evidence that disclosure would require disproportionate effort; and that the purpose of the SAR was of no consequence.

Taylor Wessing refused on three grounds: the documents would not be disclosable under Bahamian law and were protected by privilege under English law; disproportionate effort on their part would be required to inspect the documents; and the purpose of the SAR was to obtain disclosure for the sake of litigation.

Provisions in these agreements contemplated the possibility that disclosure may be required by law in response to a court order or for enforcement purposes.

... a proper interpretation of s. 14 (1) requires that the head consider whether a compelling public interest in disclosure outweighs the purpose of the exemption, to prevent interference with law enforcement.

Employers will have an obligation to keep resulting workplace harassment investigation reports confidential, unless the disclosure is necessary for the purposes of investigating or taking corrective action with respect to the incident or complaint, or is otherwise required by law.

Moreover, just weeks after St. Simons and RFF were decided, the ABA House of Delegates passed a resolution urging all «federal, state, tribal, territorial and local legislative, judicial and other governmental bodies» to support applying the attorney - client privilege to protect from disclosure «confidential communications between law firm personnel and their firms» designated in - house counsel made for the purpose of the rendition of professional legal services to the law firm» and to reject any claim that conflict of interest principles or the «fiduciary exception» undermine that claim of privilege.

The authorization for electronic disclosure of protected health information described above is not required if the disclosure is made: to another covered entity, as that term is defined by Section 181.001, or to a covered entity, as that term is defined by Section 602.001, Insurance Code, for the purpose of: treatment; payment; health care operations; performing an insurance or health maintenance organization function described by Section 602.053, Insurance Code; or as otherwise authorized or required by state or federal law.

One of those circumstances is if the disclosure is «made to a government institution... that has made a request for the information, identified its lawful authority to obtain the information and indicated that... (ii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of... carrying out an investigation related to the enforcement of any such law [of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction]...» (emphasis added).

IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, any tax information contained in this site was not intended or written to be used, and can not be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax - related penalties under federal, state or local tax law or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed on this site.

Disclosure for Management and Administration: Except as otherwise limited in this HIPAA Addendum, BirdEye may disclose PHI for the proper management and administration of the BirdEye, provided that disclosures are Required by Law or BirdEye obtains reasonable assurances from the person to whom the information is disclosed that it will remain confidential, and used or further disclosed only as Required by Law or for the purpose for which it was disclosed to the person, and the person notifies BirdEye of any instances of which it is aware in which the confidentiality of the information has been breached.

At trial, Justice Tietelbaum held the information was «personal information» for the purposes of PIPEDA and that it was not covered by litigation privilege (See Rousseau v. Wyndowe, 2006 FC 1312 (CanLII) and Canadian Privacy Law Blog: FCA grants stay of judge's order for disclosure of personal information).

made by an investigative body and the disclosure is reasonable for purposes related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada or a province; or (i) required by law.

Generally speaking, an organization subject to federal or provincial privacy laws must ensure that its collection, use or disclosure of personal information is for purposes that a reasonable person would consider are appropriate in the circumstances.

(d. 1) made to another organization and is reasonable for the purposes of investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada or a province that has been, is being or is about to be committed, and it is reasonable to expect that disclosure with the knowledge or consent of the individual would compromise the investigation;

To the extent permitted by applicable law, NCN will not be liable to you for any loss of profits, use, or data, or for any incidental, indirect, special, consequential or exemplary damages, however arising, that result from (i) the use, disclosure, or display of information by you on the Website, whether based on warranty, contract, tort (including negligence) or any other legal theory, and whether or not NCN has been informed of the possibility of such damage, and even if a remedy set forth in this agreement is found to have failed of its essential purpose.

The contract must limit further disclosures of the protected health information for these purposes to those that are required by law and to those for which the business associate obtains reasonable assurances that the protected health information will be held confidentially and that it will be notified by the person to whom it discloses the protected health information of any breaches of confidentiality.

In permitting specific uses and disclosures that are not required by law, we have considered the individual privacy interests at stake in each area and crafted conditions or limitations in each identified area as appropriate to balance the competing public purposes and individual privacy needs.

Uses and disclosures that would have been permitted without individual authorization included uses and disclosures for national priority purposes such as public health, law enforcement, and research (see proposed § 164.510) and uses and disclosures of protected health information, other than psychotherapy notes and research information unrelated to treatment, for purposes of treatment, payment, and health care operations (see proposed § 164.506).

Other sections of this rule allow covered entities to reasonably rely on certain representations by law enforcement officials (see § 164.514, regarding verification,) and require disclosure of the minimum necessary protected health information for this purpose.

We reviewed the important purposes for which some commenters said government agencies needed protected health information, and we believe that most of those needs can be met through the other categories of permitted uses and disclosures without authorization allowed under the final rule, including provisions permitting covered entities to disclose information (subject to certain limitations) to government agencies for public health, health oversight, law enforcement, and otherwise as required by law.

In such cases, where the individual is the subject of the investigation and the investigation does not relate to issues (a) through (c), the rules regarding disclosure for law enforcement purposes (see § 164.512 (f)-RRB- apply.

The commenters suggested that health oversight agencies could use their relatively unencumbered access to protected health information to circumvent the more stringent process requirements that otherwise would apply to disclosures for law enforcement purposes.

They are disclosures about victims of abuse, neglect or domestic violence (§ 164.512 (c)-RRB-, for judicial and administrative proceedings (§ 164.512 (e)-RRB-, and for law enforcement purposes (§ 164.512 (f)-RRB-.

To clarify further that health oversight disclosure rules apply generally in health care fraud investigations (subject to the exception described above), in the final rule, we eliminate proposed § 164.510 (f)(5)(i), which would have established requirements for disclosure related to health fraud for law enforcement purposes.

For example, some of the commenters arguing that a warrant or subpoena should be required prior to disclosure of protected health information unless the disclosure is for the purposes of identifying a suspect, fugitive, material witness, or missing persons, did so because they believed that such a rule would be consistent with current state law practices.

The July 1977 Report of the Privacy Protection Study Commission recommended that «each medical - care provider be considered to owe a duty of confidentiality to any individual who is the subject of a medical record it maintains, and that, therefore, no medical care provider should disclose, or be required to disclose, in individually identifiable form, any information about any such individual without the individual's explicit authorization, unless the disclosures would be» for specifically enumerated purposes such as treatment, audit or evaluation, research, public health, and law enforcement.

Rather, as described above, the final rule carves out certain activities which must always be considered law enforcement for purposes of disclosure of protected health information under this rule.

We reviewed the important purposes identified in the comments for government access to protected health information, and believe that the disclosures of protected health information that should appropriately be made without individuals» authorization can be achieved through the other disclosures provided for in the final rule, including provisions permitting covered entities to disclose information (subject to certain limitations) to government agencies for public health, research, health oversight, law enforcement, and otherwise as required by law.

In such cases, where the individual is the subject of the investigation and the investigation does not relate to health care fraud, identified as investigations regarding issues (a) through (c), the rules regarding disclosure for law enforcement purposes (see § 164.512 (f)-RRB- apply.