The Special Committee’s unanimous recommendation Sample Clauses

The Special Committee’s unanimous recommendation. 58. As noted above, on March 7, 2023, the Board of Directors established the Special Committee for the purposes of, among other things: (i) reviewing and considering the proposed form, structure, terms, conditions and timing of the Arrangement, as well as any alternative transaction proposal received by the Company; (ii) making such recommendations to the Board of Directors as it considered appropriate or desirable in relation to any such transaction (including whether or not to proceed with the Arrangement); and (iii) providing advice and guidance to the Board of Directors as to whether one or more transactions is or are in the best interests of the Company.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to The Special Committee’s unanimous recommendation

  • Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:

  • INDEPENDENT BOARD COMMITTEE AND INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL ADVISER The Independent Board Committee, comprising all the independent non-executive Directors, has been established to advise and give recommendation to the Independent Shareholders on the Loan Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereunder. An independent financial adviser will be appointed to advise the Independent Board Committee and the Independent Shareholders on, among other matters, the fairness and reasonableness of the Loan Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereunder.

  • Determinations and Actions by the Board of Directors All actions, calculations and determinations (including all omissions with respect to the foregoing) which are done or made by the Board of Directors in good faith pursuant to this Agreement, shall not subject the Board of Directors to any liability to the holders of the Rights.

  • FISCAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Recognizing the value of Union input on behalf of employees, the parties agree to the following:

  • Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users?  Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain.  Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function.  The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation?  Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator?  Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions?  Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour.  Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project?  It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.

  • Purpose of the Committee In order to xxxxxx better relations between the parties, the purpose of the Committee shall be to discuss matters of mutual concern including matters pertaining to the improvement of quality health care and safe nursing practice. The Committee shall have the power to make recommendations to the Union and to the Employer.

  • Scope of the Committee The Committee shall not have the power to bind the Union or its members, or the Employer to any decision or conclusion reached in discussion. The Committee shall not have jurisdiction over any matter contained in this Collective Agreement, including its administration or renegotiation. The Committee shall not supersede the activities of any other committee of the Union or of the Employer.

  • Decision of Board ‌ The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chair shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Arbitration Board shall be final, binding, and enforceable on the parties. The Board shall have the power to dispose of a discharge or discipline grievance by any arrangement which it deems just and equitable. However, the Board shall not have the power to change this agreement or to alter, modify, or amend any of its provisions.

  • Sub-Committees 15.1 The Joint Committee shall establish the membership and terms of reference for any sub-committees or sub-groups which it establishes and may dissolve such sub-committees or sub-groups. Sub-committees to which the Joint Committee delegates functions are bound by the provisions of this Agreement regulating the taking of decisions by the Joint Committee. The Joint Committee may create additional sub-committees from time to time as it sees fit.

  • Decision of the Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chairperson shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Board of Arbitration shall be final, binding and enforceable on all parties, and may not be changed. The Board of Arbitration shall not have the power to change this Agreement or to alter, modify or amend any of its provisions. However, the Board shall have the power to dispose of a grievance by any arrangement which it deems just and equitable.

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