Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. Tanks may terminate this Agreement upon notice to Matrix, GSAC and Xxxxx delivered at any time following June 24, 1999 and prior to the Closing, in the event any of the conditions set forth in Section 7.1 have not been satisfied for any reason on or prior to that date (other than any failure of such condition(s) to be so satisfied by reason of a breach by Xxxxxxxx or Xxxxxxxx Tanks of any of their covenants set forth in this Agreement), or have not been waived by Xxxxxxxx or Xxxxxxxx Tanks on or prior to that date.
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. 65 Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, Reasonably Vicious (Harvard University Press, 2002). 66 Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Essays on Action and Events (Oxford: OUP, 1980). Essay 12, p232. Actions can be described truthfully in many ways, and each way will say something different about what is done, some of these might have moral implications, others will appear innocent. Both Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx take it to be possible for one action to fall under different descriptions, some of which are intentional and some are not. For an action to be intentional, there must be at least one description under which it is chosen/adopted by the agent. One and the same action or event might be described variously as ‘pouring liquid’, ‘making a drink’, ‘quenching the thirst of the victim’ and ‘administering poison’. However, there is an interesting tradition of contrasting Anscombe and Xxxxxxxx’x approach to action that I explore below67. Davidson and Anscombe are not normally contrasted, and Xxxxxxx cautions that the details of their disagreement are not clearly to be found in the authors’ primary sources, because she argues, they did not appreciate the depth of disagreement between them. However, it may turn out that their approach to agency and actions are “utterly different”68. Where Xxxxxxxx’x view of action is broadly that actions are events caused in the right kind of way by mental states (including beliefs, desires etc.), Xxxxxxxx presents a challenge to the standard view expressed by Xxxxxxxx along these lines: An action’s various properties (to which its various 67 See for example, Xxxxx Xxxxx, “Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx on `the Same Action’,” Mind 85: 251–57, doi:10.2307/2253123; Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, “Actions in Their Circumstances,” in Essays on Xxxxxxxx’s “Intention,” ed. A Ford, X Xxxxxxx, and F Stoutland (Cambridge, MA, 2011), 105– 27. 68 Xxxxxxx, “Actions in Their Circumstances.” p105. descriptions are owed) “do not have their source in the workings of event– causality, but in the means/end structure of pieces of practical reasoning.”69 Xxxxxxxx’s striking denial that actions are intentional in virtue of some “extra feature” that distinguishes them from unintentional actions or mere events, is aimed at positions like Davidson’s where I have acted if my desire (that I have ice-cream) motivates and causes a change in the world. The alternative Anscombian view is “to call [an action] intentional is to assign it to the class of intentional actions and so to indicate that we should consider the qu...
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. AIX agree that Exhibit A to the Supply Agreement is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: EXHIBIT A
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. Tanks agree that, from and after the date hereof, Xxxxx, Matrix and GSAC shall have no further responsibility for the maintenance, renewal or replacement of those NOI's unless they are withdrawn or revoked by the Georgia EPD as a direct and primary result of one or more Retained Obligations, or one or more false or misleading statements made by Matrix, GSAC and/or Xxxxx in any application or other document filed by them with the Georgia EPD prior to the date hereof.
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. Tanks agree that, except for the continuing obligation of the Matrix Parties contained in Section 6.7 of the Purchase Agreement, Xxxxxxxx shall be responsible for obtaining those Title V air permits following the date hereof, and the Matrix Parties shall have no further responsibility with respect thereto, unless the written permission described above is withdrawn by the USEPA, or the USEPA refuses to issue any of those Title V air permits, as a direct and primary result of one or more Retained Obligations, or one or more false or misleading statements made by Matrix, GSAC and/or Xxxxx in any application or other document filed by them with the USEPA; provided that, the Matrix Parties shall be and remain liable (as contemplated in the Purchase Agreement) for any fines, penalties and other similar assessments, and for any Damage claims by any Governmental Bodies or other Persons, that may be imposed or asserted against, or incurred by, any Xxxxxxxx Indemnitees, as a result of any Xxxxx Party or any of their assets or properties not being in compliance with such matters or with applicable Legal Requirements for all periods prior to the date hereof.
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. We note with interest the recent filing of proxy statements by Designs, Inc. and Jewelcor Management, Inc., respectively, in connection with the 1999 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Designs currently scheduled for September 22, 1999. Designs is very important to Levi Xxxxxxx & Co., both as a large customer and as its licensee under a trademark license agreement to operate Levi's(R) and Dockers(R) outlet stores in more than 25 states. Due to this relationship, as well as the significance of the License Agreement to Designs(1), we thought that some comment from LS&CO. regarding certain of the statements in the proxy filings might help to inform the coming months for you and Designs' shareholders. First, LS&CO. does not agree with the Jewelcor proxy's assertion that the proposed election of JMI Nominees "is not a transfer of control and will not cause a concern under the License Agreement with Xxxx Xxxxxxx." To the contrary, and as Jewelcor's proxy materials go on to contemplate, LS&CO.'s view is that displacement of Designs' current Board by the JMI Nominees would fall within the License Agreement's provisions prohibiting transfers. That is, Designs would need LS&CO.'s consent for the License Agreement to continue in effect if and after the JMI Nominees displace the current Designs directors. Second, the Jewelcor proxy further indicates that in the event LS&CO. takes this view, Jewelcor will "seek to have Xxxx Xxxxxxx confirm that no 'transfer' or breach has occurred or waive the occurrence of any 'transfer' or breach." Jewelcor is, of course, free to approach LS&CO., as it deems appropriate. Based on its direct experience to date with Jewelcor and its principals (described in more detail below), however, LS&CO. is not presently inclined to waive any of its rights under the License Agreement and indeed, intends to exercise them fully.
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. Tanks do not need to give any notice to, make any filing with, or obtain any authorization, consent, or approval of any Governmental Body in order to consummate the transactions contemplated in this Agreement, other than the HSR Act filing contemplated in Sections 7.1(g) and 7.2(d).
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. Tanks shall have executed and delivered to Matrix the Non-Competition Agreement, and the other certificates, instruments, legal opinion and documents contemplated in Section 9.
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. (Rationality and Power) Xxxxxxxx disagrees with Xxxxxxxx‟ view on power. Xxxxxxxx‟s analysis of power, as Flyvbjerg (1998) points out: can be constituted only if it frees itself completely from this representation of power that I would term...”juridico-discursive”…a certain image of power- law, of power-sovereignty (Xxxxxxxx 1980 p90 as cited by Xxxxxxxxx 1998 p214). Xxxxxxxx argues that while Xxxxxxxx‟s idea is „cut off the head of the king‟, in Xxxxxxxx‟ model the head of the king “is still very much on, in the sense that sovereignty is a prerequisite for the regulation of power by law” (Flyvbjerg, 1998, p214). Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx are both concerned about domination. They try to find ways to minimise domination and create a balanced power structure but they present different approaches for achieving this goal. While Xxxxxxxx applies an objective stance and sees the constitution as a rational way of moving toward democracy, Xxxxxxxx sees the process of democratisation as a completely subjective and context- dependence struggle of power. Xxxxxxxx finds the solution in consensus and collective will formation, Xxxxxxxx realises resistance and struggle as the basis for the practice of freedom (Flyvbjerg, 1998). Xxxxxxxx believes civil society is needed to absorb the unequal distribution of social positions and power differentials resulting from them. Civil society to him is a political network of voluntary associations that is detached from class structure and facilitates the exercise of civic autonomy (Xxxxxxxx, 1998). Xxxxxxxx‟ view of civil society is neither neoliberal nor Marxist. In the view of Xxxxxxxx, through discursive communication, citizens first reach self- understanding. Civil society is conceived as a democratic self-organisation and legally institutionalised. This is in contrast with the Marxist view that demands revolutionary transformation through class conflict fighting domination (XxXxxxx, 1997). It is not liberal because the state has great power through administration. Despite the respect that Xxxxxxxx has for the potential social power of civil society and the freedom that can be generated through civil society, he believes that in the administrative framework, civil society is still restricted. Even a political process emerging from civil society must gain the measure of autonomy necessary to keep the administrative system …from sinking to the level of one party among others (Xxxxxxxx, 1998, p176). He indicates that civil society can...
Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx. Xxxxxxxxxx having failed to pay to the defendant a part of the purchase price, that is, P750,000, the vendor, the herein defendant, foreclosed the mortgage upon the said hacienda, which was adjudicated to him
