Nghĩa của từ limitation period bằng Tiếng Việt

@Chuyên ngành kinh tế
-kỳ hạn giới thiệu
-kỳ hạn thời hiệu

Đặt câu có từ "limitation period"

1. b) First question: relative or absolute effect of suspension of limitation period

2. 3. Each interruption shall cause the limitation period to begin to run afresh.

3. They conclude that an action brought against that decision cannot suspend the limitation period.

4. It was noted that paragraph dealt with the limitation period for claims in general average

5. It was noted that paragraph (2) dealt with the limitation period for claims in general average.

6. The limitation period was interrupted only by the bringing of the actions on 23 January 1995.

7. However, any action taken by the Commission with regard to the unlawful aid interrupts the limitation period.

8. Where the limitation period is interrupted, it shall start to run anew from the day of the interruption.

9. That limitation period shall be longer in cases where the alleged offender is evading the administration of justice.”

10. ‘Process served by a bailiff and an acknowledgment of debt by the State shall stop the limitation period running.

11. In order to fulfil its function of ensuring legal certainty, a limitation period must be fixed in advance by the Community legislature.

12. Each interruption starts time running afresh, but the limitation period expires at the latest on the day on which a period equal to twice the limitation period has elapsed without the Commission having imposed a fine or a penalty, in other words ten years from the date on which the infringement ceases.

13. Secondly, the limitation period starts to run afresh as from each interruption, in accordance with the first sentence of Article 2(3) of the regulation.

14. (Action for damages — Non-contractual liability — Milk — Additional levy — Reference quantity — Conversion undertaking — Forced sale of the holding — Damage — Causal link — Limitation period) (First Chamber)

15. (Agriculture - Community financial assistance - Financial irregularity vitiating the request for payment of the balance - Decision to reduce the assistance - Expiry of the limitation period - Action for annulment and damages)

16. Agriculture – Community financial assistance – Financial irregularity vitiating the request for payment of the balance – Decision to reduce the assistance – Expiry of the limitation period – Action for annulment and damages

17. This happens most often when the overall time limit is particularly short or when there is ambiguity about the way in which the limitation period can be suspended or interrupted.

18. 71 In that regard, Article 46 of the Statute of the Court of Justice envisages as an act interrupting the limitation period either the proceedings instituted before the Court or the application made prior to such proceedings by the aggrieved party to the relevant institution.

19. 88 In that regard, it should be borne in mind, first, that it is settled case-law that the list contained in Article 25(3) of Regulation No 1/2003 is prefaced by the adverb ‘in particular’ and is in no way exhaustive and that that provision does not therefore make the interruption of the limitation period dependent on a notified measure or a written authorisation to carry out investigations (see, by analogy, judgment of 15 October 2002 in Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij and Others v Commission, C‐238/99 P, C‐244/99 P, C‐245/99 P, C‐247/99 P, C‐250/99 P to C‐252/99 P and C‐254/99 P, ECR, EU:C:2002:582, paragraphs 141 and 162) and, second, that since the interruption of the limitation period constitutes an exception in relation to the five-year limitation period, it must, as such, be interpreted narrowly (judgment of 19 March 2003 in CMA CGM and Others v Commission, T‐213/00, ECR, EU:T:2003:76, paragraph 484).

20. 35 According to the applicant, logic and fairness therefore support the conclusion, in accordance with the principle of non valentem agere non currit praescriptio, that the limitation period was suspended until 22 October 2001, the day on which the Ombudsman concluded, in his decision on the applicant’s complaint, that the Commission appeared to have discriminated between the tenderers.

21. 22 According to Aegis, the breach of those principles consists in the fact that section 320, in excluding, without notice and retroactively, the limitation period for the Kleinwort Benson cause of action in relation to actions based on a mistake of law relating to a taxation matter under the care and management of the Commissioners, deprived it of the opportunity of making a claim which would otherwise have been made within the time-limits, thus rendering the exercise of the rights it derives under EU law excessively difficult or even impossible.