This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
937, which adopted the cartographic information of a 2007 Páramo Atlas to identify and delimit Colombian páramos. This behavior showed that Colombia acted with a legitimate purpose, giving meaningful consideration to competing economic, environmental, and social interests to produce a balanced policy.
937, which adopted the cartographic information of a 2007 Páramo Atlas to identify and delimit Colombian páramos. This behavior showed that Colombia acted with a legitimate purpose, giving meaningful consideration to competing economic, environmental, and social interests to produce a balanced policy.
The High Court relied and emphasized on the decisions of the Court of Appeal in Metalform Asia Pte Ltd v Holland Leedon Pte Ltd [2007] 2 SLR(R) 268, AnAn Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd v VTB Bank [2020] 1 SLR 1158 and BWG v. BWF [2020] 1 SLR 1296. 13) Telnic at [29]-[32]. 18) At [18].
It is worth recalling that Auroux (C-220/05, EU:C:2007:31 ) concerned a case involving the signing of an agreement between a municipality and a special purpose vehicle with separate balance sheet to run a re-generation programme. That re-generation programme expected to make profits from the sale of real estate to third parties.
18] And, for DoD, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) 216.203-4 limits the use of the FAR EPA clauses to DoD contracts that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (presently $250,000 with exceptions), and performance is longer than six months. [19] GAO’s competitive prejudice threshold should be similar.
Her commitment to balanced and thoughtful acquisition policy has set a standard for integrity and innovation in Federal procurement, and her transparent approach has fostered trust and collaboration among industry partners and stakeholders. Fields career is a testament to dedication, professionalism, and excellence in public service.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
52 
Let's personalize your content