Citaat | Rechtbank Den Haag 20 april 2016

Onder 5.16. Rechtbank Den Haag 20 april 2016

Een alinea uit Rechtbank Den Haag 20 april 2016, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2016:4230.

In this respect, the Russian Federation rightly pointed out that in their approach the defendants have lost sight of the interaction between paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 45 ECT. In their vision (discussed in section 5.24 and subsequent sections), a Signatory may only invoke the Limitation Clause if its national laws prohibit provisional application as such and if it has submitted a declaration in the sense of Article 45 paragraph 2. Invocation of the Limitation Clause, which relies on incompatibility of the principle of provisional application with the Constitution and other laws and regulations, appears to be difficult to reconcile with the obligation of Article 45 paragraph 2 under c to, in that case, still apply Part VII “to the extent that such provisional application” is not contrary to said laws and regulations.

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/c41b7b536312fc28d662a84342c9ad14bf27e0adff7968e8433c5063474db641. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt c41b7b536312fc28d662a84342c9ad14bf27e0adff7968e8433c5063474db641, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 152957 tot 153875.