Search for: "Does 1-39" Results 1881 - 1900 of 5,128
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jul 2017, 4:22 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
The offer letter clearly states "How to accept this offer" and lists two requirements: (1) signing and returning the Modification Agreement by December 31, 2013 a [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
  To comply with the Interpretation Act section 12(1) and CCA section 61(7) on 4 November 2015 The Crime and Courts Act 2013 (Commencement No. 14) Order 2015, signed on 27 October 2015 by Edward Faulks, Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, brought into force s.41 with Schedule 15 and s.42, as they related to sections 34-39. [read post]
9 Jul 2017, 10:04 pm by Barry Barnett
By 2015, the one-time $310 billion behemoth had shrunk into a sluggard worth just $39 billion. [read post]
8 Jul 2017, 12:21 pm
  Those differences can be reduced (in this case at least) to two fundamental issues: (1) the way that facts are weighed and balanced; (2) the basic assumptions about the role of the investor in the face of norms that must be enforced. [read post]
8 Jul 2017, 7:31 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
" (emphasis added)).The term "broadest reasonable" does not appear in 2017 U.S. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 8:43 am by Dan Carvajal
(b) Three states levy mandatory, statewide, local add-on sales taxes at the state level: California (1%), Utah (1.25%), and Virginia (1%). [read post]
2 Jul 2017, 8:06 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
, 1992 CanLII 102 (SCC), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 986, at p. 999; Jadot v. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 7:28 am by Quinta Jurecic
Date: June 28, 2017 at 7:57:39 PM EDT Subject: (SBU) IMPLEMENTING EXECUTIVE ORDER 13780 FOLLOWING SUPREME COURT RULING -- GUIDANCE TO VISA-ADJUDICATING POSTS From:   SECSTATE WASHDC Action: ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE 1. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 11:46 pm by Bill Otis
 In Luke's Gospel, 23:39-43, we read: One of the criminals who were hanging [on their crosses] kept deriding him and saying "Aren't you the Messiah? [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 12:59 pm
S. 30, 39, 48 (1994)).Secondary sources: M. [read post]
The ECJ ruled that: “…the answer to the question referred is that Article 4(1)(2) of Directive 2004/39, read in conjunction with point 1 of Section A of Annex I to that directive, must be interpreted as meaning that the investment service consisting in the reception and transmission of orders in relation to one or more financial instruments does not include brokering with a view to concluding a contract covering portfolio management services. [read post]