Case 3 definition
Case 3. , in relation to a bank, means Case 3 set out in section 6A(4) of that Act; “Case 4”, in relation to a bank, means Case 4 set out in section 6A(5) of that Act; “Case 5”—
Case 3. ' (single large transaction) means any case where, in respect of any transaction, payment is to be made by or to the applicant for business of the amount of fifteen thousand euro (€15,000) or more, and, where an occasional transaction involves a money transfer or remittance in accordance with regulation 7(11), the payment amount is one thousand euro (€1,000) or more;
Case 3 means any case where, in respect of any one-off transaction, payment is to be made by or to the applicant for business in the amount of Belize twenty thousand dollars (BZ$20,000) or its equivalent in foreign currency, or more.
Examples of Case 3 in a sentence
The MTBF shall be calculated in accordance with Bellcore V5, Basic Calculation Mode, Method 1, Case 3.
Use Case 4: Place Based COVID related analysis as outlined in the COPI Notice 10 Additional GP Information • GP Encounter • Vaccinations & Immunisations • Contraindications • OTC and Prophylactic Therapy • Family History Use Case 1: Demand and Capacity Use Case 3: Population Stratification.
The goal of Use Case 3 is to provide Participant resiliency during unexpected emergency events (“Emergency Events”) to the extent possible.
If to the Trustee: U.S. Bank National Association ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ Attention: Corporate Trust Services/HomeBanc 2007-1 If to the Delaware Trustee: Wilmington Trust Company ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Square North ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ 217498 HomeBanc 2007-1 Trust Agreement If to the Depositor: HMB Acceptance Corp.
The MTBF values were calculated according to Bellcore V5, Basic Calculation Mode, Method 1, Case 3.
More Definitions of Case 3
Case 3 means circumstances where a UK parent financial holding company or UK parent mixed financial holding company has a subsidiary institution which is a PRA- authorised person;
Case 3. In 10 years: Teachers’ salaries in Bulgaria have increased nearly 4 times. Time frame: 2007-2023 Organizations involved: Lead organizations are the trade union federations Union of Bul- garianTeachers at CITUB, Independent Teach- ers’ Union at CITUB, “Education” Union at the Confederation of Labour “Podkrepa”, and the national level confederations CITUB and CL “Podkrepa”. Scope of case: National level, Education sec- tor, primary and secondary education level. Issue/Problem to be solved: Description of the way this has been reached: Description of the results and the impact: CASE 4: Branch Collec- tive Labour Agreement for the Metallurgy Sector (BCLA) Time frame: November 2022 - November 2024
Case 3. (single large transaction) means any case where, in respect of any transaction, payment is to be made by or to the applicant for business of the amount of Five thousand United States dollars (US$5,000) or the equivalent in any other currency or more;
Case 3 means a Leverage Ratio of equal to or greater than 4.25 to 1.00, and less than 5.25 to 1.00.
Case 3. A obtains σˆB and B obtains σ∗ . This means that A has already sent C to B, and then B runs the Resolve protocol before A aborted. – Case 4: Both A and B obtain AT . This means that A has already sent C to B, and then runs the Abort protocol at some point before B resolved. – Case 5: A obtains σB and B obtains AT . This means that A has received σB and then runs the Abort protocol before B resolved. If this case happens, we claim that A misbehaves in the protocol. – Case 6: A obtains AT and B obtains σA. This means that A runs the Abort protocol after sending σA to B. If this case happens, we also claim that A misbehaves. – Case 7: A obtains AT and B obtains σ∗ . This means that both A and B successfully runs the Abort and Resolve protocol, respectively. If this case happens, we claim that the T misbehaves. – Case 8: A obtains σˆB and B obtains AT . Due to the fact that B obtains the abort-token only when A has obtained the abort-token, this case will not happen if the T is honest. Therefore, we also claim that the T misbehaves in this case. – Case 9: A obtains σˆB and B obtains σA. If this case happens, we claim that A misbehaves because B cannot obtain σA unless A has obtained σB successfully. If the first four cases occur, the protocol achieves the fairness since both parties obtain either the signature of each other, or the abort token. Since the chameleon signature is not universal verifiable, σB means nothing if B does not perform the denial protocol of chameleon signatures. On the other hand, A is not allowed to run the Abort protocol after having received σB. Similarly, A is not allowed to run the Abort protocol after sending σA to B. Moreover, A should never send σA to B unless A has obtained σB successfully. That is, if the case 5, or case 6, or case 9 occurs, it is a proof that A misbehaves. If the case 7 or 8 occurs, then T must be accountable for his misbehavior.
Case 3. 31: The dimension was “5’-0” MIN” from the back of guardrail to the center of railroad signal support is now revised to “5’-0” MIN” from face of guardrail to the front edge of the railroad signal support. Note 3, was – “The slope from the edge of the shoulder into the face of the guardrail cannot exceed 10H : 1V when the face of the guardrail is less than 12’ – 0” from the edge of the shoulder.” is revised to read: “The slope from the edge of the shoulder into the face of the guardrail cannot be steeper than 10H : 1V when the face of the guardrail is less than 12’ – 0” from the edge of the shoulder. The slope from the edge of the shoulder into the face of the guardrail cannot be steeper than 6H : 1V when the guardrail is 12’ – 0” or more from the edge of the shoulder.”
Case 3. Multiple agents, complex network, static activation setting. Case 4: Multiple neighbors, complex topology, non-static activation setting.