Traduction de «the implementation the provisions article » (Anglais → Français) :

Each Member State shall determine the sanctions to be imposed where the provisions of this Regulation are infringed. Such sanctions shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Pending the adoption, where necessary, of any legislation to this end, the sanctions to be imposed where the provisions of this Regulation are infringed shall be those determined by the Member States in order to give effect to ...[+++]Article ... of Regulation ...

Action plan of the Council and the Commission on how best to implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice | Vienna action plan

Budget Implementation Act, 1996 [ An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 6, 1996 ]

Budget Implementation Act, 1997 [ An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 18, 1997 ]

Budget Implementation Act, 1995 [ An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 1995 ]

As regards Liechtenstein, this [INSTRUMENT] constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis* which fall within the area refer ...[+++]red to in Article 1, point ..., of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU**.

Agreement of 28 April 2005 between the Swiss Confederation and the Kingdom of Denmark on the implementation, application and development of those parts of the Schengen Acquis that are based on the provisions of Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community

Decision on Review of Article 17.6 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 [ DADP ]

Decision on Review of Article 17.6 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994

invoke the provisions of an article

94. Member States shall take into account the specific situation of ð persons with special needs in the national legislation implementing this Directive. ï Vvulnerable persons such as minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children ð, victims of trafficking, persons with mental health problems ï and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, ð shall always be considered as persons with special needs ï. in the national legislation implementing the provisions ...[+++] of Chapter II relating to material reception conditions and health care

to ensure that the regulatory cooperation chapter promotes a transparent, effective, pro-competitive economic environment through the identification and prevention of potential future non-tariff barriers to trade, which disproportionately affect SME's, and the facilitation of trade and investment while developing and securing the highest levels of protection of health and safety in line with the precautionary principle laid down in Article 191 TFEU, consumer, labour environmental and animal welfare legislation and of cultural diversity that exists in the EU; to support, whilst fully respecting regulatory autonomy, the establishment of a ...[+++] structured dialogue and cooperation between regulators in the most transparent way possible and involving stakeholders; to include cross-cutting disciplines on regulatory coherence and transparency for the development and implementation of efficient, cost-effective, and more compatible regulations for goods and services; negotiators on both sides need to identify and to be very clear about which technical procedures and standards are fundamental and cannot be compromised, which ones can be the subject of a common approach, which are the areas where mutual recognition based on a common high standard and a strong system of market surveillance is desirable and which are those where simply an improved exchange of information is possible, based on the experience of several years of talks in a variety of fora including the Transatlantic Economic Council and the High Level Regulatory Cooperation Forum to ensure similarly that it will not affect standards that have yet to be set in areas where the legislation or the standards are very different in the US as compared with the EU, such as, for example, the implementation of existing (framework) legislation (e.g. REACH), or the adoption of new laws (e.g. cloning), or future definitions affecting the level of protection (e.g. endocrine disrupting chemicals); to ensure that any provisions on ...

to ensure that the regulatory cooperation chapter promotes a transparent, effective, pro-competitive economic environment through the identification and prevention of potential future non-tariff barriers to trade, which disproportionately affect SME's, and the facilitation of trade and investment while developing and securing the highest levels of protection of health and safety in line with the precautionary principle laid down in Article 191 TFEU, consumer, labour environmental and animal welfare legislation and of cultural diversity that exists in the EU; to support, whilst fully respecting regulatory autonomy, the establishment of a ...[+++] structured dialogue and cooperation between regulators in the most transparent way possible and involving stakeholders; to include cross-cutting disciplines on regulatory coherence and transparency for the development and implementation of efficient, cost-effective, and more compatible regulations for goods and services; negotiators on both sides need to identify and to be very clear about which technical procedures and standards are fundamental and cannot be compromised, which ones can be the subject of a common approach, which are the areas where mutual recognition based on a common high standard and a strong system of market surveillance is desirable and which are those where simply an improved exchange of information is possible, based on the experience of several years of talks in a variety of fora including the Transatlantic Economic Council and the High Level Regulatory Cooperation Forum to ensure similarly that it will not affect standards that have yet to be set in areas where the legislation or the standards are very different in the US as compared with the EU, such as, for example, the implementation of existing (framework) legislation (e.g. REACH), or the adoption of new laws (e.g. cloning), or future definitions affecting the level of protection (e.g. endocrine disrupting chemicals); to ensure that any provisions on ...

(i) to ensure that the regulatory cooperation chapter promotes a transparent, effective, pro-competitive economic environment through the identification and prevention of potential future non-tariff barriers to trade, which disproportionately affect SME's, and the facilitation of trade and investment while developing and securing the highest levels of protection of health and safety in line with the precautionary principle laid down in Article 191 TFEU, consumer, labour environmental and animal welfare legislation and of cultural diversity that exists in the EU; to support, whilst fully respecting regulatory autonomy, the establishment ...[+++]of a structured dialogue and cooperation between regulators in the most transparent way possible and involving stakeholders; to include cross-cutting disciplines on regulatory coherence and transparency for the development and implementation of efficient, cost-effective, and more compatible regulations for goods and services; negotiators on both sides need to identify and to be very clear about which technical procedures and standards are fundamental and cannot be compromised, which ones can be the subject of a common approach, which are the areas where mutual recognition based on a common high standard and a strong system of market surveillance is desirable and which are those where simply an improved exchange of information is possible, based on the experience of several years of talks in a variety of fora including the Transatlantic Economic Council and the High Level Regulatory Cooperation Forum to ensure similarly that it will not affect standards that have yet to be set in areas where the legislation or the standards are very different in the US as compared with the EU, such as, for example, the implementation of existing (framework) legislation (e.g. REACH), or the adoption of new laws (e.g. cloning), or future definitions affecting the level of protection (e.g. endocrine disrupting chemicals); to ensure that any provisions ...