This is a limited overview – please sign up or subscribe to know everything we know about the term “subclause”. “The importance of the rule was never defined by European Union law, but was a Czech interpretation of a signature.” Almost without exception, the current text of an agreement is divided into articles, sections, subsections and other listed clauses. In large agreements, articles are sometimes grouped into chapters. The subdivision of the provisions considerably improves the legibility and legibility of a contract; allows the author to cross-reference and if the contract is well structured, readers can find each other effectively. This paragraph examines the principles of subdivision, insemination and frequently used numbering. But then it says that by “paragraph” the subsections can be divided into “paragraphs” and “sub-parts” – what I collectively call clauses listed below the table. However, it also has drawbacks, as parallel units may not contain complete sentences, as in the following example: parallel units can be followed by a middle or lower section (which leads to a “sandwich of sentences”), but each unit must be able to be read grammatically with the middle or lower section, or the middle or lower section must be a complete sentence. Ultimately, I don`t depend on the labels you use for articles, sections, and subsections. For me, it is more a question of distinguishing between sections, subsections and articles dealing with how to group sentences and, on the other hand, clauses that are listed on the table, which deal with how to divide individual sentences. Stop using these phrases in 2020 (use these synonyms instead) See the Government of Ireland Bill, clause 25, subsection (a), b) and (c). Why do “left” and “right” mean liberal and conservative? In Chapter 3 of the CSM, I refer to sections that can be grouped into articles and divided into subsections. Since this terminology is the norm in the United States, I did not think to consider other names. I am also talking about how a given sentence – perhaps a very long sentence – may contain, in a section or subsection, a number of listed clauses that can be integrated or presented in a tabular manner.
And each given enumerated clause may itself contain another set of listed clauses, although if you have more than two levels of clauses listed in a certain set, the matyoshka doll effect would normally make it harder to read than easier. To look at the English terminology, I looked at my book on design written by an English lawyer. (It is outnumbered by my Canadian and Australian titles.) I`m not crazy about this book, so I won`t mention its name. (Yes, I know I should read Mark Anderson`s book!) One way to test the existence of such problems is to read provisions without the divisions of the paragraphs. If the syntax is not grammatical, there are problems. Another way to identify an equivalence problem is to verify that the link between the paragraphs would occur in the ordinary language. In the two examples I just cited, it would not be used. Paragraphs are prioritized in the sense that a given entity can be divided into additional units. In federal legislation, the numbering and terminology used to refer to units at each level are as follows: the sentence in paragraph (b) should be moved as follows to a lower section or another subsection: the adjustment is evaluated according to the decrease in the guaranteed performance or efficiency offered in the offer under the standard of 100.
using the methodology defined in BDS subsection 39.3 (e) of the BDS. . . .