Not if you read the passage according to
the normal rules of language.
Not exact matches
Thus, if that
rule of thumb holds true (due to the
normal profit / greed motive
of humankind), then it follows that among the 120 followers, a number
of those followers spoke two
languages.
When you immerse yourself in different
languages, cultures, foods, and ways
of life, it really opens up your mind and forces you to examine the society and
rules that you always accepted as «
normal.»
Given the
language of the collective agreement and the Protocol, it is not a reasonable conclusion that the parties intended to give an unlimited discretion to the arbitration board to develop a new workload and compensation scheme to apply to the return to work after the strike on a case by case basis and to have that system operate in conjunction with the
rules in Article 11 applicable to the «
normal workload.»
We restate here the
language in the preamble to the proposed
rule that «An individual or organization that bills and / or is paid for health care services or supplies in the
normal course
of business, such as * * * an «online» pharmacy accessible on the Internet, is also a health care provider for purposes
of this statute» (64 FR 59930).
The
language is unclear — a «tactical» burden is strictly speaking different from a «evidentiary» one and it prefaced by the statement «the
normal rules of evidence and proof apply» so this clearly is not a reverse onus.