Double Jeopardy. A final, non-appealable order issued in a proceeding initiated by (i) BPDB and based on a claim of breach of the Power Purchase Agreement shall be with prejudice to any proceedings against the Company that the GOB could otherwise bring for breach by the Company of substantially the same obligations under this Agreement. Nothing in this Section 18.11 shall prevent the GOB from separately initiating proceedings to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section 13.3.
Double Jeopardy. A final, non-appeal able order issued in a proceeding initiated by the Government and based on a claim of breach of the Contract shall be with prejudice to any proceedings against the Company that BPDB could otherwise bring for breach by the Company of substantially the same obligations under this Contract. Nothing in this Section shall prevent BPDB and the Government from separately initiating proceedings to terminate this Contract, pursuant to Section 4 of this Contract.
Double Jeopardy. A final, non-appealable order issued in a proceeding initiated by the GOB and based on a claim of breach of the Implementation Agreement shall be with prejudice to any proceedings against the Company that BPDB could otherwise bring for breach by the Company of substantially the same obligations under this Agreement. Nothing in this Section shall prevent BPDB and the GOB from separately initiating proceedings to terminate this Agreement and the Implementation Agreement, respectively, pursuant to Section 4 and Section 13.1(a) and 13.2 of the Implementation Agreement.
Double Jeopardy. A final, non-appealable order issued in a proceeding initiated by the GOB and based on a claim of breach of the Implementation Agreement shall be with prejudice to any proceedings against the Company that NCC could otherwise bring for breach by the Company of substantially the same obligations under this Land Use Agreement. Nothing in this Section 10.9 shall prevent NCC and the GOB from separately initiating proceedings to terminate this Land Use Agreement and the Implementation Agreement, respectively, pursuant to Section 7.4 and Sections 13.1 and 13.3 of the Implementation Agreement.
Double Jeopardy. Both CUC and Contractor shall be entitled to an indemnity under this Section 18 only to the extent that they have not received payment for the same loss, damage, death or injury under a policy of insurance.
Double Jeopardy. Extradition of a person shall not be granted when he has already been tried and discharged or acquitted by a competent tribunal, or has already undergone punishment in the Requested State or in a third State for the act or omission constituting the offence for which his extradition is requested.
Double Jeopardy. Extradition shall not also be granted in any of the following:
Double Jeopardy. A final, non-appealable order issued in a proceeding initiated by the GOP and based upon a claim of breach of the Implementation Agreement shall be with prejudice to any proceedings against the Seller based upon the same claim that the Purchaser could otherwise bring for breach by the Seller of its obligations under this Agreement. Nothing in this Section shall prevent the Purchaser and the GOP from separately initiating proceedings to terminate this Agreement and the Implementation Agreement, respectively, pursuant to Sections 16.3 and 16.4 of this Agreement and Sections 14.1 and 14.3 of the Implementation Agreement.
Double Jeopardy. New Report Examines the Impact that Third-
Double Jeopardy. The settlement or waiver in writing by any Party (or, in the case of the GOL, LEC) of any dispute or breach under the Power Purchase Agreement shall be binding on such Party (or, in the case of LEC, the GOL) with respect to any identical or substantially similar issue or claim or any issue or claim based upon the identical or substantially similar facts and circumstances, as the case may be.
