risque de blesser – English Translation – Keybot Dictionary

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch Français Spacer Help
Source Languages Target Languages
Keybot      21 Results   14 Domains
  healthycanadians.gc.ca  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
L'utilisation inadéquate de certaines solutions pour lentilles cornéennes risque de blesser l'oeil
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine healthycanadians.gc.ca as primary domain
Improperly declared milk in certain Trung Nguyen G7 brand coffee products
  www.notmar.gc.ca  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
De plus, il existe un risque de blesser sérieusement des personnes se trouvant sur ou près des rives et rivages. Les enfants sont particulièrement vulnérables à ces risques.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine notmar.gc.ca as primary domain
1.1 During recent years there has been a marked increase in damage to wharves, boat-houses, small boats, moored ships, and erosion of the shoreline caused by draw-off and wave disturbance created by the passage of ships and boats.
  www.epo.org  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Le fait que l'invention présente un inconvénient (en l'occurrence le risque de blesser les utilisateurs) susceptible d'en rendre l'utilisation impossible ne constitue pas un obstacle à sa reproductibilité, dès lors que l'enseignement technique divulgué dans le brevet litigieux permet d'obtenir le résultat souhaité par ailleurs (T 881/95).
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine epo.org as primary domain
Where a disadvantage of an invention (in this case the risk of injury to users) could prevent its use, this is not an obstacle to reproducibility provided that the otherwise desired result is achieved by the technical teaching disclosed in the patent in suit (T 881/95). An Art. 83 EPC objection concerning the absence of any detailed indication of the use envisaged for the products cannot succeed, as Art. 83 EPC merely requires the invention to be sufficiently disclosed (see e.g. T 866/00).
  www.plan.planningmotion.com  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Ils aboutissent à l’unité parce qu’on s’inquiète de leur sécurité. Par exemple, une personne peut être admise parce qu’elle a des idées suicidaires, a perdu le contact avec la réalité ou est agressive et risque de blesser quelqu’un gravement.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine nbrhc.on.ca as primary domain
Most people come to the unit through hospital emergency services.  They come because of worries about their safety. Problems that lead to admission include worries about possible suicide, losing touch with what’s real, or being aggressive to the point that someone could get seriously hurt.
  4 Hits csc.lexum.org  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Elle a reconnu l’existence d’une [traduction] « conception générale des rapports donnant lieu à une obligation de diligence, dont les décisions publiées dans les recueils ne sont que des exemples » (p. 580, lord Atkin). La notion générale d’une obligation envers les personnes que l’on risque de blesser s’est avérée un outil puissant et pratique.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine csc.lexum.org as primary domain
9 Before the decision of the House of Lords in Donoghue v. Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562, the law governing tort liability for wrongs to others was a complex of categories derived from cases decided over the centuries.  In Donoghue v. Stevenson, the House of Lords replaced the category approach with a principled approach.  It recognized the existence of a “general conception of relations giving rise to a duty of care, of which the particular cases found in the books are but instances” (p. 580, per Lord Atkin).  The general concept of a duty owed to those whom one might injure proved both powerful and practical.  However, it brought with it a question — a question we wrestle with to this day.  How do we define the persons to whom the duty is owed?
  2 Hits www.rcmp.gc.ca  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Un porte-parole de la GRC, le caporal Gilles Blinn, a indiqué que si les policiers ont des motifs raisonnables de croire qu'un individu est probablement violent et risque de blesser ou tuer quelqu'un, ils doivent demander une ordonnance lui interdisant de posséder des armes à feu.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine rcmp.gc.ca as primary domain
RCMP spokesman Cpl. Gilles Blinn said if police officers have reasonable and probable grounds to believe a person is violent and could harm someone, they will request a ban on that person from owning or possessing firearms. But, he said, police officers weigh the level of the threat to someone's safety in each case. Blinn said unfortunately a ban on firearms wouldn't necessarily have stopped McCurdy from killing Buchanan."What's to stop him from killing someone with a hammer or a knife?" he said. "If someone really wants to kill their spouse, they're going to do it." However, researcher Deborah Doherty said access to guns greatly escalates the risk of someone being killed in violent homes. "It's a lot harder to strangle somebody or to kill them with a knife than on the spur of the moment" pull the trigger," said Doherty, who is the executive director of the Public Legal Education and Information Service of New Brunswick.
  4 Hits scc.lexum.org  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
Elle a reconnu l’existence d’une [traduction] « conception générale des rapports donnant lieu à une obligation de diligence, dont les décisions publiées dans les recueils ne sont que des exemples » (p. 580, lord Atkin). La notion générale d’une obligation envers les personnes que l’on risque de blesser s’est avérée un outil puissant et pratique.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain
9 Before the decision of the House of Lords in Donoghue v. Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562, the law governing tort liability for wrongs to others was a complex of categories derived from cases decided over the centuries.  In Donoghue v. Stevenson, the House of Lords replaced the category approach with a principled approach.  It recognized the existence of a “general conception of relations giving rise to a duty of care, of which the particular cases found in the books are but instances” (p. 580, per Lord Atkin).  The general concept of a duty owed to those whom one might injure proved both powerful and practical.  However, it brought with it a question — a question we wrestle with to this day.  How do we define the persons to whom the duty is owed?