Proof. The cardholder agrees and accepts that his monthly account statement constitutes conclusive proof of indebtedness and agrees to pay the indebtedness shown on his monthly account statement in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The cardholder agrees to review each monthly statement and if an error is found, the cardholder must tell Desjardins within 30 days of the issue date of the statement. If the cardholder does not do so, the statement will be regarded as final. However, Desjardins may at any time remove from the cardholder’s account any credits that have been posted in error. The cardholder also agrees and accepts that the transaction record issued by an accessible device constitutes proof that the transaction he has carried out has been correctly recorded. In the case of a card-not-present or contactless transaction, as indicated under Section 22 of this Agreement, the cardholder agrees that the entry of the transaction on his monthly account statement will constitute proof that the transaction was indeed carried out. Desjardins is not responsible for providing other proof of transactions, unless the cardholder requests it to avoid or settle a dispute within the meaning of this Agreement, unless in such case, he provides Desjardins with a transaction record confirming the purchase or the cash advance. The cardholder agrees that any data support on which the data pertaining to the transactions made is stored constitutes a sufficient written proof for all legal proceedings.
Proof. We start by establishing that two read operations that return v and u respectively occur in ei. As v is written in T [R + K], v is also written in T [R + i + 1] (Lemma 1). Let p the process that performs the first write of v in T [R + i + 1]. By the code, p executes round R + i before performing that write operation, and v is the estimate of p in that round. At the beginning of round R + i, p either reads v in T [R + i] or writes v in T [R + i]. Moreover, the read operation on T [R + i + 1] performed by p at the beginning of round R + i + 1 returns ⊥ (Otherwise p does not perform a write operation on T [R + i + 1]). Therefore, every operation performed by p while it is executing round R + i occurs in epoch eR+i. K In particular, the read of T [R + j] performed by p at line 10 occurs in eR+i. This read must return v. Otherwise, p writes true in C[R + i], and this operation occurs in eR+i. As no process ever writes false in C[R + i], every read operation performed on C[R + i] that occurs in later epochs return true. Consider a process p′ executing round R + K. p′ reads C[R + i] at line 15. This read operation occurs after a write operation has been performed on T [R + ], so it occurs after the end of epoch eR+i. Hence, that operation returns true and thus p′ cannot write in D in that round. Therefore, no value is committed in round R + K, contradicting assumption H. Similarly, by considering the process that performs the first write of u in T [R + i + 1], we get that a read operation of T [R + j] that returns u occurs in eR+i. j Finally, as there are two read operations of T [R + j] returning two different values occur in ei, there must exist a write operation on T [R+j] that occurs in ei. We thus conclude that Wi /= ∅.
Proof. All sick leave used shall be certified by the employee and by such other evidence as the Employer may require. Falsification of such evidence may be cause for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. The Employer may require that an employee present medical certification of physical or mental fitness to continue working.
Proof. 18 All sick leave used shall be certified by the employee and by such other evidence as the 19 Employer may require. When the Employer has reasonable grounds for doing so, the 20 Employer may require an employee to provide acceptable verification. The Employer will 21 advise the employee of the need for medical verification prior to the employee returning 22 to work. Falsification of such evidence may be cause for disciplinary action up to and 23 including dismissal. The Employer may require that an employee present medical 24 certification of physical or mental fitness to continue working.
Proof. If the height of α is 0, and the common frontier (α itself) exists, then α is common. If the height of α is σ, the children of α are all in common by using induction hypothesis with the height of the children at σ-1, then the vertex α is common. ■