Betekenis van:
itemisation

itemisation
Zelfstandig naamwoord
    • the act of making a list of items

    Synoniemen

    Hyperoniemen

    Hyponiemen


    Voorbeeldzinnen

    1. Itemisation is the criterion which the measure fails to satisfy in its current form.
    2. This itemisation requirement was not brought to Hungary’s attention by the Commission until the letter dated 19 March 2004.
    3. The Commission letter appeared to be fully exhaustive as regards the concept of applicability after accession and did not refer in any way to the itemisation requirement.
    4. The Czech Republic believes that for any claims by these named shareholders under Clause 4.1 of the Indemnity Agreement, the Commission’s itemisation requirement is met.
    5. The Commission letter appeared to be fully exhaustive as regards the concept of applicability after accession and did not refer in any way to the itemisation requirement. Itemisation is the criterion which the measure fails to satisfy in its current form.
    6. In addition, the Commission considers that a mere cap without listing (itemisation) of the specific events which might give rise to indemnity does not tie the payment of the indemnity after accession to a specific event finally and unconditionally identified prior to accession.
    7. In neither of these cases was any mention made of any itemisation requirement, i.e. the requirement that the risks be precisely defined and included in an exhaustive list closed by the date of accession in order for a given indemnity undertaking not to qualify as applicable after accession.
    8. In addition, in May 2006 the Czech Republic submitted a list comprising the names of all shareholders of AGB as of 30 April 2004. The Czech Republic believes that for any claims by these named shareholders under Clause 4.1 of the Indemnity Agreement, the Commission’s itemisation requirement is met.
    9. However, that letter did not explicitly address the assessment of indemnity undertakings, nor did it explicitly require itemisation, namely that the risks should be precisely defined and included in an exhaustive list closed by the date of accession, as a criterion for the indemnity undertaking not to be considered applicable after accession.
    10. This itemisation requirement was not brought to Hungary’s attention by the Commission until the letter dated 19 March 2004. This letter referred explicitly to the Postabank case and gave guidance on the post-accession applicability of the indemnity undertaking, in particular as regards the three criteria referred to in paragraph 14 of this decision and in paragraph 52 of the decision initiating the procedure, as stated above.