Common Issues Sample Clauses
The 'Common Issues' clause identifies and addresses typical problems or disputes that may arise during the execution of an agreement. It often outlines procedures for handling recurring matters such as delays, payment discrepancies, or misunderstandings about deliverables, providing guidance on how parties should respond. By proactively acknowledging these potential issues, the clause helps prevent confusion and streamlines the resolution process, ultimately reducing the risk of conflict and ensuring smoother contract performance.
Common Issues. (1) The Plaintiffs agree that, in the motions for certification or authorization of the Proceedings as class proceedings for settlement purposes and for the approval of this Settlement Agreement, the only common issues that they will seek to define are the Common Electrolytic Issue and the Common Film Issue, and the only classes that they will assert are the Ontario Electrolytic Settlement Class, the Ontario Film Settlement Class, the Québec Settlement Class and the BC Electrolytic Settlement Class.
Common Issues. The common issues to be certified as against the Settling Parties will be:
i. Did FMP breach its contracts with the Class members? If so, how?
ii. Did FMP owe a fiduciary duty to the Class members, and if so, in what respect? If yes, did FMP breach its fiduciary duty owed to the Class members, and if so, how?
iii. Did the Settling Parties owe a duty of care to the Class members with respect to the claims asserted against them in negligence or negligent misrepresentation?
iv. If the Settling Parties owed a duty of care to the Class members with respect to the claims in negligence or negligent misrepresentation, what was the applicable standard of care for the Settling Parties?
v. If the Settling Parties owed a duty of care to the Class members with respect to the claim in negligence or negligent misrepresentation, did the Settling Parties breach the applicable standard of care? If so, how?
vi. Did FMP make fraudulent misrepresentations to the Class members, and, if so, is FMP liable to the Class with respect thereto?
vii. Did FMP conspire with any one or more of Fortress Real Capital Inc., Fortress Real Developments Inc., ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Building & Development Mortgages Canada Inc., or others, with the intent to cause harm to the Class members? If so, did the conspiracy cause harm to the Class members?
viii. Can the Class members’ damages be assessed, in whole or in part, in the aggregate, and if so, what is the quantum of their aggregate damages?
Common Issues. The Parties to this Memorandum of Understanding share the common understanding that is stated below:
Common Issues. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if a dispute arises relating to return allowance under Exhibit “F” of the Benefits Agreement and such dispute includes any issue arising under or relating to Section 4.11 of this Agreement (or if disputes arise that involve any issues common to both the Benefits Agreement and this Agreement), there shall be one arbitration of those disputes pursuant to the Dispute Resolution Procedure of the Benefits Agreement, and all of the provisions of the Dispute Resolution Procedure of the Benefits Agreement shall apply to such arbitration.
Common Issues. ICSMS It was found that there were no current guidelines / guidance documents by the Commission stemming from the European regulations as to address WHEN and FOR WHICH PARTICULAR MARKET SUVEILLANCE PROCESSES (taking into account effectiveness and usefulness) such a system is to be used by market surveillance authorities. Is it for all individual ms activities or is it just for those products sent for sampling? This is only an example and more guidance is needed to ensure that the system will be used in the same manner by all ms authorities and in a realistic way considering the administrative burden. Online sales Online sales was also an area where possibly not enough has been done. Some Member States have started to focus on this particular issue and some even have particular units to address this issue. The authorities are currently still waiting for the guidance document to be issued by the special working group at Commission level. This document was announced as a draft by the end of this summer. However, it has not yet been finalized and ms authorities really need to have some overall guidance in the area of online sales so that one can ensure that there is a basic level of a consistent approach at European level. Screening Equipment During the CIMS Review, screening equipment for toys was mentioned a number of times. The small cylinder test and other basic equipment was being used by market surveillance inspectors in the area of toys. In order to try to rationalize available resources and tools between the market surveillance authorities, it was agreed that a list of screening equipment used particularly by inspectors on toys will be listed by each participating authority in a document and sent to the Task Leader and Task Coordinator so that this is further shared with participants from JA2014.