Traduction de «justification par preuve conditionnelle » (Français → Anglais) :

1. Member States shall ensure that in proceedings relating to an action for damages in the Union, upon request of a claimant who has presented a reasoned justification containing reasonably available facts and evidence sufficient to support the plausibility of its claim for damages, national courts are able to order the defendant or a third party to disclose relevant evidence which lies in their control, subject to the conditions set out in this Cha ...[+++]pter.

2. Member States shall ensure that national courts are able to order the disclosure of specified items of evidence or relevant categories of evidence circumscribed as precisely and as narrowly as possible on the basis of reasonably available facts in the reasoned justification.

Mr. John McKay: Before I hear from Mr. Barrette, going back to the objective part and the evidence that would be in front of a court, if it's circumscribed evidence, it's a summary of evidence or something, and so the actual real material is only known by the crown and the judge, doesn't that lead into a bit of a Kafkaesque scenario where we've achieved demonstrability because we say it's demonstrable, and your objective test then goes out the window.

(Return tabled) Question No. 104 Hon. Wayne Easter: With regard to imprisonment for life: (a) what offences in the Criminal Code allow for imprisonment for life; (b) how many individuals have been charged with an offence carrying with it a sentence of imprisonment for life, for each of the last ten years, broken down by province and offence; (c) for the individuals charged in (b), how many were convicted; (d) for the individuals in (c), how many received a sentence of life imprisonment; (e) how many individuals in Canada are serving a sentence of “imprisonment for life” and broken down by province and offence, (i) in what year were t ...[+++]hey sentenced, (ii) how many have been designated as dangerous offenders, (iii) of those designated in (ii), how many have received parole in the last 20 years, broken down by year, (iv) of those designated in (iii), how many have reoffended while on parole; (f) how many prisoners serving a sentence of imprisonment for life applied for parole and how many of them received parole, broken down by year, for the last 20 years; (g) what is the percentage of prisoners sentenced to life whose parole is approved, broken down by year, for the last 25 years, (i) of those sentenced to life, what type of parole was granted, (ii) of the breakdown in (i), how many committed an offence, (iii) what is the recidivism rate of those sentenced for life who are granted parole; (h) what is the percentage of prisoners not sentenced to life whose parole was approved, broken down by year, for the last 25 years, (i) of those not sentenced to life, what type of parole was granted, (ii) of the breakdown in (i), how many committed an offence, (iii) what is the recidivism rate of those not sentenced for life who are granted parole; (i) is there evidence to demonstrate that offenders sentenced to life and granted parole are more likely to reoffend while on parole than offenders not sentenced to life who are granted parole, (i) what evidence has the government ...

The first criterion requires that it is demonstrated and documented that exposure in all scenarios is well below an appropriate derived no-effect level (DNEL) or predicted no-effect concentration (PNEC) derived under specific conditions.

3. Where the application for action is lodged by a representative of the right-holder or of any other person authorised to use one of the rights referred to in Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation, proof shall, in addition to the proof referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, consist in his authorisation to act.