Strategic Use of International and Domestic Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in the Danube Delta Case Sample Clauses

Strategic Use of International and Domestic Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in the Danube Delta Case. In 2003, The Government of Ukraine approved a project to dig a deep-water navigation channel through Ukraine’s portion of the Danube Delta Bilateral Biosphere Reserve. Ecopravo-Lviv (EPL), a Ukrainian public interest environmental law NGO, challenged this decision on both environmental and procedural grounds (including a lack of public participation in the EIA process). In addition to seeking remedies in national courts (see case study under Guideline 41(i) ), EPL filed complaints with a variety of relevant international bodies in late 2003 and early 2004. These include: ➢ The Compliance Committee of the [Aarhus Convention] (on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters). Romania also subsequently filed a complaint with the Compliance Committee; ➢ The Implementation Committee of the Espoo Convention (on EIA in a transboundary context). [The Implementation Committee refused, by a vote of 4-3 in 2004, to consider the complaint.] Romania subsequently filed a complaint with the Implementation Committee; ➢ A Letter of Emergency Notification filed with the Executive Secretary of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species; ➢ An Emergency Complaint filed with the Permanent Secretariat of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River; and ➢ A Letter of Notification filed with the Secretariat of the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA). In addition EPL has raised the issue with the Ramsar Convention and the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme, and both institutions have expressed concern about the channel. This strategy of seeking relief through multiple domestic courts and international dispute resolution mechanisms can be resource intensive. Also non-state actors that seek recourse from an international mechanism may — but not necessarily — be required to exhaust domestic remedies first. Exhaustion of remedies depends on the terms of the particular MEA or institution, and there often are exceptions for specific instances (e.g., emergency or futility).
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Strategic Use of International and Domestic Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in the Danube Delta Case

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution Limitations This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. TIPS, a department of Region 8 Education Service Center, a political subdivision, and local government entity of the State of Texas, does not agree to binding arbitration as a remedy to dispute and no such provision shall be permitted in this Agreement with TIPS. Vendor agrees that any claim arising out of or related to this Agreement, except those specifically and expressly waived or negotiated within this Agreement, may be subject to non-binding mediation at the request of either party to be conducted by a mutually agreed upon mediator as prerequisite to the filing of any lawsuit arising out of or related to this Agreement. Mediation shall be held in either Camp or Titus County, Texas. Agreements reached in mediation will be subject to the approval by the Region 8 ESC's Board of Directors, authorized signature of the Parties if approved by the Board of Directors, and, once approved by the Board of Directors and properly signed, shall thereafter be enforceable as provided by the laws of the State of Texas. Does Vendor agree? Yes, Vendor agrees Does Vendor agree? Yes, Vendor agrees No Waiver of TIPS Immunity This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. Vendor agrees that nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign or government immunity; nor constitute or be construed as a waiver of any of the privileges, rights, defenses, remedies, or immunities available to Region 8 Education Service Center or its TIPS Department. The failure to enforce, or any delay in the enforcement, of any privileges, rights, defenses, remedies, or immunities available to Region 8 Education Service Center or its TIPS Department under this Agreement or under applicable law shall not constitute a waiver of such privileges, rights, defenses, remedies, or immunities or be considered as a basis for estoppel. 5 Does Vendor agree? Yes, Vendor agrees

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution Process Owner may establish a dispute resolution process to be utilized in advance of that outlined in Tex. Gov’t Code, Chapter 2260.

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution Prior to filing of litigation, the parties may select non-binding mediation as a method of conflict resolution for issues arising out of or relating to this procurement process or any contract resulting from or any contemplated transaction. The parties agree that if non-binding mediation is chosen as a resolution process, the parties must agree to the chosen mediator(s) and that all mediation venue shall be at a location in Xxx Xxxxx County, Texas or agreed by the parties. The parties agree to share equally the cost of the mediation process and venue cost.

  • Negotiation; Alternative Dispute Resolution The Parties will attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute or controversy arising out of or relating to the performance of services under this Agreement. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute, then, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 21.36, Contractor may submit to the Contracting Officer a written request for administrative review and documentation of the Contractor's claim(s). Upon such request, the Contracting Officer shall promptly issue an administrative decision in writing, stating the reasons for the action taken and informing the Contractor of its right to judicial review. If agreed by both Parties in writing, disputes may be resolved by a mutually agreed-upon alternative dispute resolution process. If the parties do not mutually agree to an alternative dispute resolution process or such efforts do not resolve the dispute, then either Party may pursue any remedy available under California law. The status of any dispute or controversy notwithstanding, Contractor shall proceed diligently with the performance of its obligations under this Agreement in accordance with the Agreement and the written directions of the City. Neither Party will be entitled to legal fees or costs for matters resolved under this section.

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) The City and the Union encourage the use of the City’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Program or other alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes to resolve non-contractual workplace conflicts/disputes. Participation in the program or in an ADR process is entirely voluntary and confidential.

  • Dispute Resolution/Mediation (a) Either party may commence the dispute resolution process of this Section 8.2 by giving the other party written notice (a “Dispute Notice”) of any controversy, claim or dispute of whatever nature arising out of or relating to or in connection with this Agreement, any Ancillary Agreement or the breach, termination, enforceability or validity thereof (a “Dispute”) which has not been resolved in the normal course of business or as provided in the relevant Ancillary Agreement. The parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any Dispute by negotiation between executives of each party (“Senior Party Representatives”) who have authority to settle the Dispute and, unless discussions between the parties are already at a senior management level, who are at a higher level of management than the Persons who have direct responsibility for the administration of this Agreement or the relevant Ancillary Agreement. Within fifteen (15) days after delivery of the Dispute Notice, the receiving party shall submit to the other a written response (the “Response”). The Dispute Notice and the Response shall include (i) a statement setting forth the position of the party giving such notice and a summary of arguments supporting such position and (ii) the name and title of such party’s Senior Party Representative and any other Persons who will accompany the Senior Party Representative at the meeting at which the parties will attempt to settle the Dispute. Within thirty (30) days after the delivery of the Dispute Notice, the Senior Party Representatives of both parties shall meet at a mutually acceptable time and place, and thereafter as often as they reasonably deem necessary, to attempt to resolve the Dispute. The parties shall cooperate in good faith with respect to any reasonable requests for exchanges of Information regarding the Dispute or a Response thereto.

  • Mini-Bid Dispute Resolution Process If the Authorized User does not have a dispute resolution policy, please refer to OSC or OGS dispute resolution policy for guidance in creating a policy. In the event the Contractor has any disputes with the Authorized User, the Contractor shall so notify the Authorized User in writing. If either party notifies the other of such dispute, the other party shall then make good faith efforts to solve the problem or settle the dispute amicably, including meeting with the party’s representatives to attempt diligently to reach a satisfactory result through negotiation. In the event that the Contractor and the Authorized User are unable to resolve a conflict through negotiation, then both parties will comply with the Authorized User’s stated dispute resolution policy which must be included as part of the Authorized User Agreement. If the conflict is still unresolved, please refer to section 4.2.1.II.A.3 for guidance. Mini-Bid Proposal Validity All Contractor responses to Authorized User Mini-Bids must remain open and valid for at least 60 days from the Mini-Bid opening date, unless the time for awarding the Authorized User Agreement is extended by mutual consent of the Authorized User and the Contractor. A Contractor’s Mini-Bid response shall continue to remain an effective offer, firm and irrevocable, subsequent to such 60 day period until either tentative award of the Authorized User Agreement by the Authorized User is made or withdrawal of the Contractor response in writing by the Contractor. Tentative award of the Authorized User Agreement shall consist of written notice to that effect by an Authorized User to a successful Contractor, who shall thereupon be obligated to execute a formal Authorized User Agreement. SIGNATURE PAGE

  • Customer Service, Dispute Resolution If you have a question about your XOOM charges or service you may contact XOOM directly by calling 0-000-000-0000 Monday – Friday 8 (eight) a.m. to 11 (eleven)p.m.

  • Scope, Consultations, Mediation and Conciliation Disputes between the Contracting Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall, as far as possible, be settled amicably or through consultations, mediation or conciliation.

  • CENTRAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS The following process pertains exclusively to disputes and grievances on central matters that have been referred to the central process. In accordance with the School Board Collective Bargaining Act, 2014 central matters may also be grieved locally, in which case local grievance processes will apply. In the event that central language is being grieved locally, the local parties shall provide the grievance to their respective central agents.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.