SPS Sample Clauses

SPS. Coal Supply Agreement (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Station) between SPS and TUCO, dated May 1, 1979 (Form 8-K (file no. 001-03789), May 14, 1979 — Exhibit 3).

SPS. Indenture dated Feb. 1, 1999 between SPS and the Chase Manhattan Bank SPS Form 8-K dated Feb. 25, 1999 001-03789 99.2

SPS. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al., 611 Phil. 194 (2009); ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Transport Inc., v. Lapanday Holdings Corp., 479 Phil. 768 (2004); Sps. Reterta v. Sps. Mores and ▇▇▇▇▇, 671 ▇▇▇▇. 346 (2011); Ongsitco v. Court of Appeals, 325 Phil. 1069 (1996); Espinoza v. Provincial Adjudicator, 545 Phil. 535 (2007). 17 479 Phil. 768, 782 (2004). 18 531 Phil. 620 (2006). 19 216 SCRA 107 (1992). We held that since the passengers suffered an injury for which compensation was due, the airline company could not be allowed to escape liability by arguing that the trial court’s orders had attained finality due to the passengers’ failure to move for reconsideration or to file a timely appeal.20 In ▇▇▇▇, we allowed the occasional departure from the general rule that the extraordinary writ of certiorari cannot substitute for a lost appeal only because the rigid application of the rule would have resulted in injustice to the passengers.21 We find no basis to relax the rules of procedure in the present case. While it is true that liberal application of the rules of procedure is allowed to avoid manifest failure or miscarriage of justice, it is equally true that a party invoking liberality must explain his failure to abide by the rules.22 To reiterate, ▇▇▇▇▇ failed to explain why he did not appeal the dismissal order while admitting that he could have done so. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, he clung to his argument that he had correctly filed a petition for certiorari because of the alleged grave abuse of discretion on the part of the RTC. ▇▇▇▇▇’s reasoning is faulty. We do not see why appeal could not have been speedy and adequate. As admitted by ▇▇▇▇▇ himself, he received the RTC’s final dismissal order on February 24, 2006,23 yet, he waited for two months before he took action by filing the petition for certiorari on April 20, 2006.24 Indeed, if speed had been ▇▇▇▇▇’s concern, he should have appealed within fifteen days from his receipt of the final order denying his motion for reconsideration, and not waited for two months before taking action.25 Moreover, an appeal would have adequately resolved his claim that the RTC erred in dismissing his complaint against ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, an order granting a motion to dismiss being final and appealable. Further, we are not convinced that ▇▇▇▇▇ filed the petition for certiorari because the RTC allegedly gravely abused its discretion. The more tenable explanation for his wrong choice of remedy is that the period to appeal simply lapsed without an appeal having been filed. Having lost his righ...

SPS. SPS is an urban public school district and a political subdivision of the State of Missouri which is governed by its Board of Education. SPS is the Missouri Fiscal Agent for Launch. SPS’s Administrative offices are located at ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇.

SPS. The Chapter reaffirms the WTO obligations of the contracting parties. The Chapter contains provisions with regard to import checks, certificates, the approval of products and establishments and ensures low threshold consultation mechanisms. Furthermore, the Chapter: - Reinforces transparency requirements and information exchange to ensure the import and export of safe products only. - Provides for faster, detailed and predictable procedures. The Chapter also foresees the possibility to review the chapter in the future with a view of extending to the other Parties treatment granted to the EU.

SPS. Fishing club. This data will not be shared with any other party or organisation. I acknowledge that I am fully aware of the risks associated with fishing and that by taking part I accept responsibility for my own actions. No responsibility is accepted by W-A-S-P-S Fishing Club or the landowners for loss or damage to persons or property.

SPS. Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of June 20, 2016 among SPS, as Borrower, the several lenders from time to time parties thereto, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Bank of America, N.A. and Barclays Bank Plc, as Syndication Agents, and ▇▇▇▇▇ Fargo Bank, National Association and The Bank of Tokyo- Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., as Documentation Agents. (Exhibit 99.04 to Form 8-K of Xcel Energy dated June 20, 2016 (file no. 001-03034)).

SPS. Indenture dated Feb. 1, 1999 between SPS and the Chase Manhattan Bank SPS Form 8-K dated Feb. 25, 1999 99.2 4.56* Supplemental Indenture dated Oct. 1, 2003 between SPS and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as successor Trustee, creating $100 million principal amount of Series C and Series D Notes, 6% due 2033 Xcel Energy Inc. Form 10-Q for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2003 4.04 4.57* Supplemental Indenture dated Oct. 1, 2006 between SPS and the Bank of New York, as successor Trustee, creating $200 million principal amount of 5.6% Series E Notes due 2016 and $250 million principal amount of 6% Series F Notes due 2036 SPS Form 8-K dated Oct. 3, 2006 4.01

SPS. SPS has all necessary power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement and to consummate the transactions provided by this Agreement.