Effects of the Proposals Sample Clauses

Effects of the Proposals. 9.1 Share capital and substantial shareholders’ shareholdings The Proposals are not expected to have any effect on the issued and paid-up share capital and the substantial shareholders’ shareholdings of the Company as the Proposals do not involve any issuance of new securities by the Company.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Effects of the Proposals. 5.1 Issued and paid-up share capital The JVA will not have any effect on the issued and paid-up share capital of the Company as it does not involve the issuance of new HCK shares.
Effects of the Proposals. Based on the varied terms of the Proposals, the effects of the Proposals are set out according to the following assumptions:
Effects of the Proposals. The Internal Reorganisation will not have any material effect on the Company’s issued and paid-up share capital, consolidated net assets (“NA”) and gearing, consolidated earnings and substantial shareholders’ shareholdings. The effect of the Proposals on the Company’s issued and paid-up share capital, consolidated NA and gearing, consolidated earnings and substantial shareholders’ shareholdings are set out below:
Effects of the Proposals. 5.1 Issued and paid-up share capital and Substantial Shareholders’ Shareholdings There is no effect on the issued and paid-up share capital of Seacera as the Purchase Price shall be or has been paid entirely by cash and does not involve any issuance of shares in Seacera.
Effects of the Proposals. The Supply Agreement, Proposed Ratification and Proposed Diversification will not have any effect on the share capital and substantial shareholder’s shareholding in the Group. Although the Supply Agreement and the Proposed Diversification are expected to contribute positively to the Group’s financial growth and future earnings, the Supply Agreement and the Proposed Diversification will not have any immediate effect on the NA, gearing, earnings and earnings per share (“EPS”) of the Group. The Proposed Ratification will not have any effect on the NA and gearing of the Group. However, the Proposed Ratification will have immediate effect to the earnings of Anzo Group.
Effects of the Proposals 
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Effects of the Proposals

  • Additional proposals If the Company at any time during the continuance of this Agreement desires to modify expand or otherwise vary its activities carried on pursuant to this Agreement beyond those specified in any approved proposal, it shall give notice of such desire to the Minister and within 2 months after giving such notice shall submit to the Minister detailed proposals in respect of such modifications expansions or variations and such other matters as the Minister may require. The provisions of clause 4 and 5 (including (for the avoidance of doubt) clause 5(9)) shall apply, the necessary changes being made, to proposals submitted pursuant to this clause.

  • Evaluation of Proposals 29.1 UNDP shall examine the Proposal to confirm that all terms and conditions under the UNDP General Terms and Conditions and Special Conditions have been accepted by the Proposer without any deviation or reservation.

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

  • 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.

  • Consideration of proposals 6. (1) In respect of each proposal pursuant to subclause (1) of Clause 5 the Minister shall —

  • Rejection of Proposals The County reserves the right to reject any and all proposals or to accept the proposal or any part thereof which it determines to best serve the needs of the County and to waive any informalities or irregularities in the proposals. While cost is a factor in any contract award, it is not the only factor and may not be the determining factor.

  • Proposals For Work Order contracts, the Contractor shall submit to System Agency separate proposals, including pricing and a project plan, for each Project.

  • Audit Findings Vendor shall implement any required safeguards as identified by Citizens or by any audit of Vendor’s privacy and security controls.

  • Additional Matters (a) Any claim on account of a Liability which does not result from a Third Party Claim shall be asserted by written notice given by the Indemnitee to the related Indemnifying Party. Such Indemnifying Party shall have a period of 30 days after the receipt of such notice within which to respond thereto. If such Indemnifying Party does not respond within such 30-day period, such Indemnifying Party shall be deemed to have refused to accept responsibility to make payment. If such Indemnifying Party does not respond within such 30-day period or rejects such claim in whole or in part, such Indemnitee shall be free to pursue such remedies as may be available to such party as contemplated by this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements.

  • FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no budget implications. The applicant will be responsible for all costs, expenses, liabilities and obligations imposed under or incurred in order to satisfy the terms of this proposed development agreement. The administration of the proposed development agreement can be carried out within the approved 2019- 2020 budget and with existing resources.

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