「不決定」に関連した英語例文の一覧と使い方(40ページ目) - Weblio英語例文検索

テキストでは事業リスクマネジメントの主要なプロセスとして、①リスクを将来の不確実性としてとらえ、それを適切に発見、特定、分析、評価するための具体的手法である「リスクの評価・把握」、②把握したリスクに対して適切な処理手段を講じたり、最適な意思決定を行ったりすることでリターンを最大化するための具体的手法である「リスクへの対応」、③リスクに関する情報を適切に記録、保管、表現、伝達して社内外の関係者の理解と信頼を得るための具体的手法である「リスク情報の伝達」の３つを挙げており、ケーススタディを用いながら、各手法の理論と実践を紹介している。例文帳に追加

The textbook cites the three major processes of enterprise risk management and describes the theory and practice of each of them with the aid of case studies: (i) "risk evaluation assessment and understanding," the specific method of appropriately detecting, identifying, analyzing and assessing risks defined as an uncertainty about the future; (ii) "risk response," the specific method of maximizing return by adequately responding to identified risks and making most appropriate decisions; and (iii) "communication of risk information," the specific method of obtaining the understanding and trust of people inside and outside companies by appropriately recording, storing, describing and communicating information related to risks. - 経済産業省

第二百五十二条　破産手続開始前の再生債務者に関する次に掲げる場合における破産法の関係規定（破産法第七十一条第一項第四号並びに第二項第二号及び第三号、第七十二条第一項第四号並びに第二項第二号及び第三号、第百六十条（第一項第一号を除く。）、第百六十二条（第一項第二号を除く。）、第百六十三条第二項、第百六十四条第一項（同条第二項において準用する場合を含む。）、第百六十六条並びに第百六十七条第二項（同法第百七十条第二項において準用する場合を含む。）の規定をいう。第三項において同じ。）の適用については、再生手続開始の申立て等（再生手続開始の申立ての棄却、再生手続廃止若しくは再生計画不認可の決定又は再生計画取消しの決定（再生手続の終了前にされた申立てに基づくものに限る。）が確定した場合にあっては再生手続開始の申立て、再生手続開始によって効力を失った特別清算の手続における特別清算開始の申立て又は破産法第二百六十五条の罪に該当することとなる再生債務者、その法定代理人若しくは再生債務者の理事、取締役、執行役若しくはこれらに準ずる者の行為をいい、再生計画取消しの決定であって再生手続の終了前にされた申立てに基づくもの以外のものが確定した場合にあっては再生計画取消しの申立てをいう。以下この項において同じ。）は、当該再生手続開始の申立て等の前に破産手続開始の申立てがないときに限り、破産手続開始の申立てとみなす。例文帳に追加

Article 252 (1) In the following cases concerning the rehabilitation debtor against whom bankruptcy proceedings have not yet been commenced, for the purpose of application of the relevant provisions of the Bankruptcy Act (meaning the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, Article 71(1)(iv) and (2)(ii) and (iii), Article 72(1)(iv) and (2)(ii) and (iii), Article 160 (excluding paragraph (1)(i)), Article 162 (excluding paragraph (1)(ii)), Article 163(2), Article 164(1) (including cases where applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to paragraph (2) of said Article), Article 166, and Article 167(2) (including cases where applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 170(2) of said Act); the same shall apply in paragraph (3)), a petition for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings, etc. (in cases where an order of dismissal with prejudice on the merits of a petition for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings, an order of discontinuance of rehabilitation proceedings, an order of disconfirmation of the rehabilitation plan or an order of revocation of the rehabilitation plan (limited to one based on a petition filed prior to the close of rehabilitation proceedings) becomes final and binding, this phrase refers to a petition for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings, petition for commencement of special liquidation in the proceedings for special liquidation that have ceased to be effective as a result of the commencement of rehabilitation proceedings, or any act conducted by the rehabilitation debtor or his/her statutory agent or the rehabilitation debtor's director, executive officer or any other person equivalent thereto, which shall constitute the crime set forth in Article 265 of the Bankruptcy Act, and in cases where an order of revocation of the rehabilitation plan, which is not based on a petition filed prior to the close of rehabilitation proceedings, becomes final and binding, said phrase refers to a petition for revocation of the rehabilitation plan; hereinafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) shall be deemed to be a petition for commencement of bankruptcy proceedings only where no petition for commencement of bankruptcy proceedings has been filed prior to said petition for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings, etc:  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

第百八十九条　経済産業局長は、第二十一条第一項（第三十六条第二項、第四十五条第三項又は第五十条第三項において準用する場合を含む。）、第五十二条、第五十五条、第八十三条第一項若しくは第百八十四条の規定による処分の通知、第二十五条第一項、第四十条第二項、第四十七条第三項（第六十四条の二第二項又は第六十六条第五項において準用する場合を含む。）、第五十七条第一項、第九十一条第二項、第百一条第二項若しくは第百六条第三項の規定による通知、第三十七条第一項、第三十八条第一項、第三十九条第一項、第四十八条第一項、第四十九条第一項、第百八十二条若しくは第百八十三条の規定による命令又は第四十七条第五項（第六十四条の二第二項又は第六十六条第五項において準用する場合を含む。）若しくは第九十四条第二項の規定による決定書の謄本の交付をする場合において、相手方が知れないとき、又はその所在が不分明なときは、鉱業出願人、鉱業権者若しくは抵当権者にあつては願書若しくは鉱業原簿に記載された住所の所在地の、土地の所有者にあつては採掘出願地の所在地の市役所、町村役場又はこれに準ずるものの掲示場に、その通知若しくは命令又は決定書の謄本の内容を掲示するとともに、その掲示をした旨及びその要旨を官報に掲載しなければならない。この場合においては、掲示を始めた日又は官報に掲載した日のいずれか遅い日から十四日を経過した日に、その通知若しくは命令又は決定書の謄本は、相手方に到達したものとみなす。例文帳に追加

Article 189 When the Director of Regional Bureau of Economy, Trade and Industry notifies a disposition pursuant to the provision of paragraph (1) of Article 21 (including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis to paragraph (2) or Article 36, paragraph (3) of Article 45 or paragraph (3) of Article 50), Article 52, Article 55, paragraph (1) of Article 83 or Article 184, gives a notice pursuant to the provision of paragraph (1) of Article 25, paragraph (2) of Article 40, paragraph (3) of Article 47 (including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis to paragraph (2) of Article 64-ii or paragraph (5) of Article 66), paragraph (1) of Article 57, paragraph (2) of Article 91, paragraph (2) of Article 101 or paragraph (3) of Article 106, gives an order pursuant to the provision of paragraph (1) of Article 37, paragraph (1) of Article 38, paragraph (1) of Article 39, paragraph (1) of Article 48, paragraph (1) of Article 49, Article 182 or Article 183, or delivers transcripts of the written decision pursuant to the provision of paragraph (5) of Article 47 (including the case where it applies mutatis mutandis to paragraph (2) of Article 64-ii or paragraph (5) of Article 66) or paragraph (2) of Article 94, he/she shall post the description of such notice, such order and the transcripts of such written decision at the posting area of the offices of municipality or any facility equivalent to the above in the location of the address mentioned in the written application or mining registry in the case of mining applicant, holder of mining right or mortgagee or at the posting area of the offices of municipality or any facility equivalent to the above in the location of the digging application area in the case of land owner, if the other party or the location thereof is unknown, and publish such posting and the gist thereof in an official gazette. In this case, such notice, such order and the transcripts of such written decision shall be deemed to have reached the other party on the day 14 days after the day of commencement of posting or the day of publication in an official gazette, whichever is later.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

(3) 技術水準を決定する場合に，その旨の請求が提出されたときは，ある発明に関する情報を考慮に入れないものとする。ただし，前記の発明を含む最初の特許出願又は実用新案登録出願のエストニア共和国又は外国における出願日前12月以内に，第12条により特許についての権利を有する者によって，又は当該人が認識していることを前提として他人によって，当該情報が開示されていることを条件とする。前記の請求は，特許出願と同時に又は第24条による特許出願公開の少なくとも2月前に行わなければならない。他人が当該情報を不法に取得したか又は当該情報が不法に公表されたか若しくは特許出願権を有する者が公表を認識していなかったときは，請求は，特許出願の審査の過程で又は特許について係争が生じたときに行うことができる。請求書には，それを裏付ける証拠を添付しなければならない。例文帳に追加

(3) In determining the state of the art, any information relating to an invention is not taken into consideration, provided that a corresponding request is submitted, if such information is disclosed by a person who is entitled to the patent pursuant to § 12 of this Act or another person with the knowledge of the said person within twelve months before the filing date of the first patent application or registration application of a utility model containing the invention in the Republic of Estonia or abroad. The request shall be filed together with the patent application or not later than two months before the publication of the patent application pursuant to § 24. If another person acquired the information unlawfully or the information was published unlawfully or without the knowledge of the person who has the right to apply for the patent, the request may be filed in the course of the examination of the patent application orin case the patent is contested. Evidence supporting the request shall be appended to the request.  - 特許庁

２　会社法第三百六条第三項から第七項まで（株主総会の招集手続等に関する検査役の選任）及び第三百七条（裁判所による株主総会招集等の決定）、第八百六十八条第一項（非訟事件の管轄）、第八百七十条（第二号に係る部分に限る。）（陳述の聴取）、第八百七十一条（理由の付記）、第八百七十二条（第四号に係る部分に限る。）（即時抗告）、第八百七十四条（第一号に係る部分に限る。）（不服申立ての制限）、第八百七十五条（非訟事件手続法の規定の適用除外）並びに第八百七十六条（最高裁判所規則）の規定は、前項の申立てがあった場合について準用する。この場合において、同法第三百六条第四項及び第七項中「株式会社」とあるのは「特定目的会社」と、同法第三百七条第一項第一号、第二項及び第三項中「株主総会」とあるのは「社員総会」と、同条第一項第二号中「株主」とあるのは「社員」と読み替えるものとするほか、必要な技術的読替えは、政令で定める。例文帳に追加

(2) The provisions of Article 306(3) to (7) inclusive (Election of Inspector on Calling Procedures of Shareholders Meeting), Article 307 (Determination by the Court of the Calling of Shareholders Meeting), Article 868(1) (Jurisdiction over Non-Contentious Cases), Article 870 (limited to the portion pertaining to item (ii)) (Hearing of Statements), Article 871 (Appending of the Reason), Article 872 (limited to the portion pertaining to item (iv)) (Immediate Appeal), Article 874 (limited to the portion pertaining to item (i)) (Restrictions on Appeal), Article 875 (Exclusion from Application of the Provisions of the Non-Contentious Cases Procedures Act), and Article 876 (Supreme Court Rules) of the Companies Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to cases where the petition set forth in the preceding paragraph has been filed. In this case, the term "the Stock Company" in Article 306(4) and (7) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "the Specific Purpose Company," the term "a shareholders meeting" in Article 307(1)(i), (2), and (3) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a general meeting of members," the term "the shareholders" in Article 307(1)(ii) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "the members," and any other necessary technical replacement of terms shall be specified by a Cabinet Order.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

２　会社法第三百五十八条第二項、第三項及び第五項から第七項まで（業務の執行に関する検査役の選任）、第三百五十九条（裁判所による株主総会招集等の決定）、第八百六十八条第一項（非訟事件の管轄）、第八百七十条（第二号に係る部分に限る。）（陳述の聴取）、第八百七十一条（理由の付記）、第八百七十二条（第四号に係る部分に限る。）（即時抗告）、第八百七十四条（第一号に係る部分に限る。）（不服申立ての制限）、第八百七十五条（非訟事件手続法の規定の適用除外）並びに第八百七十六条（最高裁判所規則）の規定は、前項の申立てがあった場合の検査役及びその報告があった場合について準用する。この場合において、同法第三百五十八条第三項及び第七項中「株式会社」とあるのは「特定目的会社」と、同項中「株主」とあるのは「社員」と、同法第三百五十九条第一項第一号、第二項及び第三項中「株主総会」とあるのは「社員総会」と、同条第一項第二号中「株主」とあるのは「社員」と読み替えるものとするほか、必要な技術的読替えは、政令で定める。例文帳に追加

(2) The provisions of Article 358(2), (3), and (5) to (7) inclusive (Election of Inspector of Execution of Inspector), Article 359 (Decision by Court to Call Shareholders Meeting), Article 868(1) (Jurisdiction over Non-Contentious Cases), Article 870 (limited to the portion pertaining to item (ii)) (Hearing of Statements), Article 871 (Appending of the Reason), Article 872 (limited to the portion pertaining to item (iv)) (Immediate Appeal), Article 874 (limited to the portion pertaining to item (i)) (Restrictions on Appeal), Article 875 (Exclusion from Application of the Provisions of the Non-Contentious Cases Procedures Act), and Article 876 (Supreme Court Rule) of the Companies Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to an inspector where the petition set forth in the preceding paragraph has been filed or to cases where the inspectors report has been given. In this case, the term "the Stock Company" in Article 358(3) and (7) of the Companies Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "the Specific Purpose Company," the term "the shareholders" in Article 358(7) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "members," the term "shareholders meeting" in Article 359(1)(i), (2), and (3) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "general meeting of members," the term "shareholders" in Article 359(1)(ii) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "members," and any other necessary technical replacement of terms shall be specified by a Cabinet Order.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

第百十四条の六　裁判所は、著作者人格権、著作権、出版権、実演家人格権又は著作隣接権の侵害に係る訴訟において、その当事者が保有する営業秘密（不正競争防止法（平成五年法律第四十七号）第二条第六項に規定する営業秘密をいう。以下同じ。）について、次に掲げる事由のいずれにも該当することにつき疎明があつた場合には、当事者の申立てにより、決定で、当事者等、訴訟代理人又は補佐人に対し、当該営業秘密を当該訴訟の追行の目的以外の目的で使用し、又は当該営業秘密に係るこの項の規定による命令を受けた者以外の者に開示してはならない旨を命ずることができる。ただし、その申立ての時までに当事者等、訴訟代理人又は補佐人が第一号に規定する準備書面の閲読又は同号に規定する証拠の取調べ若しくは開示以外の方法により当該営業秘密を取得し、又は保有していた場合は、この限りでない。例文帳に追加

Article 114-6 (1) In a lawsuit pertaining to an infringement on the moral rights of author, copyright, right of publication, moral rights of performer or neighboring right, the court may, upon petition of a party, issue an order, in the form of a decision, to any other party, etc., trial counsel or assistant in court to a party or legal counsel, that trade secrets (means "trade secrets" as provided for in Article 2, paragraph (6) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (Act No. 47 of 1993); the same shall apply hereinafter) in the possession of the [petitioning] party shall not be used for purposes other than those in furtherance of said lawsuit and shall not be disclosed to persons other than those against whom an order pertaining to such trade secrets has been issued pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph, where a prima facie showing has been made that each of the reasons listed below applies; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not apply where, at the time of such petition, the party, etc. [against which the petitioned order is sought to be issued], trial counsel [against which the petitioned order is sought to be issued] or assistant in court [against which the petitioned order is sought to be issued] had already acquired or possessed such trade secrets by means other than through inspection of the briefs as provided for in item (i) or the examination of evidence or the disclosure provided for in that item.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

(4) 変更請求は，共同体商標出願として付与された出願日に提出されたとみなされ，優先権又は経過年数が主張されている場合は，これらの権利を享受するものとする。更に，変更請求は国内商標出願と同様に処理される。ただし，変更の請求対象が既に登録された共同体商標に言及する場合は，更なる手続なく，国内商標の地位が付与され，第22条(4)の規定が適用されるが，放棄，不更新又は商標所有者に起因するその他の理由により，決定がスペインにおける保護に影響を与える可能性のある無効又は失効の理由の実質に関して係属しているという事実は除くものとし，この場合は，当該請求は国内商標出願として処理される。本項に定める直接付与の合意に対しては，絶対的又は相対的禁止事由の存在を根拠として審判請求することができないが，当該審判請求は，有効な変更の要件又は申請した共同体商標を直接付与する要件を充足しないことを根拠として行うことができる。例文帳に追加

(4) An application for conversion shall be considered filed on the filing date granted to it as a Community trademark application and, if it claimed priority or age, it shall benefit from these rights. Moreover, the application for conversion shall be processed in the same way as a national trademark application. Nevertheless, if the application for conversion refers to a Community trademark already registered, it shall be granted the status of a national trademark without further procedure, and the provisions of Article 22(4) shall apply, apart from the fact that, owing to renunciation, failure to renew or any other cause attributable to its owner, a pronouncement has been pending as regards the substance of any reason for invalidity or lapse capable of affecting the protection of the trademark in Spain, in which case it shall be processed as a national trademark application. No appeal based on the existence of absolute or relative prohibitions may be lodged against the direct grant agreement provided for in this paragraph, but such an appeal may be based on failure to satisfy the requirements for the valid conversion or direct grant of the Community trademark applied for. - 特許庁

取消訴訟が先の登録商標の所有者によって提起された場合において，被告が異議を申し立てたときは，その所有者は訴訟の提起前の5年間に先の登録商標が第26条の規定に基づき使用されていることを立証しなければならない。ただし，その先の商標がその日に5年以上登録されている場合に限る。訴訟の提起後に，不使用の5年の期間が満了する場合は，原告は，被告が異議を申し立てたときは，口頭審理の終結前の5年間に先の商標が第26条の規定に基づき使用されていることを立証しなければならない。後の商標の登録の公告日に，先の商標が5年以上の期間登録されていた場合において，被告が異議を申し立てたときは，原告はまた，その日に，先の商標の登録が第49条[1]に基づいて取り消されるべきものでなかったことも立証しなければならない。決定においては，使用が立証された商品又はサービスのみが考慮されるものとする。例文帳に追加

If the action for cancellation has been brought by the proprietor of an earlier registered trade mark, he shall, if the defendant has filed an objection, furnish proof that the earlier registered trade mark has been put to use pursuant to Section 26 during a period of five years preceding the bringing of the action, provided the earlier trade mark has at this date been registered for not less than five years. If the period of five years of non-use ends after the bringing of the action, the plaintiff shall, if the defendant has filed an objection, furnish proof that the trade mark has been put to use pursuant to Section 26 during the period of five years preceding the end of the oral proceedings. Where the earlier trade mark has been registered for a period of not less than five years at the date of publication of the registration of the later trade mark, the plaintiff shall also, if the defendant has filed an objection, furnish proof that, at that date, the registration of the earlier trade mark could not have been canceled under Section 49(1). In the decision, only those goods or services of which use has been proved shall be considered.  - 特許庁

ホ　破産法第百八十六条第一項の規定による担保権消滅の許可の申立て、同法第百九十二条第三項の規定による商事留置権消滅の許可の申立て、同法第二百四十八条第一項の規定による免責許可の申立て若しくは同法第二百五十六条第一項の規定による復権の申立て、民事再生法第百四十八条第一項の規定による担保権消滅の許可の申立て、行政事件訴訟法の規定による執行停止決定の取消しの申立て、若しくは仮の義務付け若しくは仮の差止めの決定の取消しの申立て、労働組合法（昭和二十四年法律第百七十四号）第二十七条の二十の規定による申立て、配偶者からの暴力の防止及び被害者の保護に関する法律第十六条第三項若しくは第十七条第一項の規定による申立て、労働審判法第四条第一項ただし書の規定による弁護士でない者を代理人に選任することの許可を求める申立て、特定債務等の調整の促進のための特定調停に関する法律第七条第一項若しくは第二項の規定による民事執行の手続の停止若しくは続行を命ずる裁判を求める申立て、家事審判法第十五条の六の規定による申立て、人事訴訟法（平成十五年法律第百九号）第三十九条第一項の規定による申立て、特許法（昭和三十四年法律第百二十一号）第百五条の四第一項若しくは第百五条の五第一項の規定による申立て、著作権法（昭和四十五年法律第四十八号）第百十四条の六第一項若しくは第百十四条の七第一項の規定による申立て又は不正競争防止法（平成五年法律第四十七号）第十条第一項若しくは第十一条第一項の規定による申立て例文帳に追加

(e) The filing of a petition for permission to extinguish a security interest under the provisions of Article 186, paragraph (1) of the Bankruptcy Act, a petition for permission to extinguish a right of retention under the Commercial Law under the provisions of Article 192, paragraph (3) of the Bankruptcy Act, a petition for a grant of discharge under the provisions of Article 248, paragraph (1) of said Act or a petition for the restoration of rights under the provisions of Article 256, paragraph (1) of said Act, a petition for permission to extinguish a security interest under the provisions of Article 148, paragraph (1) of the Civil Rehabilitation Act, a petition for revocation of an order for a stay of execution or a petition for the revocation of a provisional mandatory order or a provisional injunctive order under the provisions of the Administrative Case Litigation Act, a request under the provisions of Article 27-20 of the Labor Union Act (Act No. 174 of 1949), a petition under the provisions of Article 16, paragraph (3) or Article 17, paragraph (1) of the Act on the Prevention of Spousal Violence and the Protection of Victims, a petition for permission to appoint a person who is not an attorney-at-law as an agent under the provisions of the proviso to Article 4, paragraph (1) of the Labor Tribunal Act, a petition for a judicial decision ordering a stay or a continuation of civil execution proceedings under the provisions of Article 7, paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) of the Act on Special Conciliation Proceedings for Expediting Adjustment of Specified Debts, etc., a petition under the provisions of Article 15-6 of the Act on Adjudication of Domestic Relations, a petition under the provisions of Article 39, paragraph (1) of the Personal Status Litigation Act (Act No. 109 of 2003), a motion under the provisions of Article 105-4, paragraph (1) or Article 105-5, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act (Act No. 121 of 1959), a petition under the provisions of Article 114-6, paragraph (1) or Article 114-7, paragraph (1) of the Copyright Act (Act No. 48 of 1970), or a petition under the provisions of Article 10, paragraph (1) or Article 11, paragraph (1) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (Act No. 47 of 1993)  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

私は、論理的に矛盾はしていないというふうに思っています。やはり、このペイオフというのは、たしか1971年ぐらいにこの制度ができたのだと思いますが、ペイオフはあのとき、たくさんの銀行がつぶれましたし、私自身も1997年から98年まで第二次橋本内閣の閣僚でございましたが、あのときも北海道拓殖銀行が倒産しまして、それから山一証券が破綻しまして、まさにあの時期、数十の金融機関が日本国で破綻したわけでございますからね。そのとき、ご存じのように、当時非常に預金者の不安があり、たくさんの金融機関が破綻いたしましたので、ペイオフは1996年から2002年３月まで、法律上は（記載が）あっても、ペイオフを実施はしないということを、政府として決定されたわけでございますが、今は金融状態もご存じのように、足利銀行以来、ある程度落ち着いておりますし、世界的にはリーマン・ショックというのがございましたが、日本は金融の全体的な情勢が落ち着いておるということは皆さんもご存知だと思いますので、やはり私は、預金する方もきちっと自己責任においてどういう銀行かというのを選ぶ必要があると。そして同時に、私は特に経営者の方にも強調したい。ペイオフになったら（預金者の方に対して）大変申しわけないわけですよ。1,000万円プラス利子以上の方が、この預金保険法によって概算払いができて、後から幾らかは減りますから、そういったことで非常に預金者の方にご迷惑をかけるわけですから、そういった意味でも、私は日本の金融機関のすべての経営者、経営に携わっている人に改めて、金融業はそれほど重たいものであるという経営責任をきちっと分かっていただきたい。例文帳に追加

I do not think there are any inconsistencies in the logic. If my memory serves me correctly, the “pay-off” scheme was established around 1971—back then, many banks went bankrupt. In my personal experience, while I served as Minister in the Second Hashimoto Cabinet from 1997 to 1998, Hokkaido Takushoku Bank went bankrupt, Yamaichi Securities collapsed, and dozens of financial institutions failed in Japan at the time. As depositors were extremely anxious back then due to the collapse of many financial institutions, the government decided not to implement the “pay-off” scheme between 1996 and March 2002 despite the existence of legal provisions. Today, financial conditions have somewhat settled since the collapse of Ashikaga Bank, and Japan’s financial climate is calm on the whole, notwithstanding the Lehman Brothers shockwave on a global scale. At the end of the day, I believe depositors need to choose banks based on the principle of self-responsibility. At the same time, there is one thing I would like to emphasize especially to top management executives—the borrowers. They should feel very sorry to depositors if the “pay-off” scheme is implemented. Individuals with 10 million yen in deposits plus interest who are entitled to receive provisional payback under the Deposit Insurance Act will ultimately have the amount reduced to a certain extent, thereby causing substantial trouble to depositors. In that sense, all top management executives and others involved in the management of Japanese financial institutions should re-acknowledge the gravity of their management responsibility for financial business.  - 金融庁

標章登録の取消申請は，次のように行うことができる。 (a)IP法に基づく標章の登録日から5年以内 (b)当該登録標章が，登録に係わる商品若しくはサービス又はその一部について普通名称になっているか放棄されている場合，当該登録が不正に若しくはIP法の規定に反して得られた場合，又は登録人により若しくは登録人の許可を得て当該登録標章が商品若しくはサービスの出所を偽って表示するように使用されている場合は，いつでも。当該登録標章が当該商品又はサービスの一部のみについて普通名称になっている場合は，当該一部の商品又はサービスについてのみ取消申請をすることができる。登録標章は，ある独特の商品若しくはサービスの名称としても又はある独特の商品若しくはサービスを特定するためにも使用されているということのみを理由としては，商品又はサービスの普通名称であるとはみなさない。登録標章が当該標章を使用している商品又はサービスの普通名称になっているか否かを決定するに当たっては，購入者の購入の動機ではなく，関係する公衆にとっての当該標章の主要な意味が基準になるものとする。購入者の動機に関する証拠は認められない。 (c)登録商標所有者が正当な理由なく3年以上継続してフィリピンにおいて当該標章を使用しなかったか又はライセンスによりフィリピンにおいて使用させることをしなかった場合は，いつでも。例文帳に追加

The petition for cancellation of the registration of a mark may be filed: (a) Within five years from the date of registration of the mark under the IP Code; (b) at any time, if the registered mark becomes the generic name for the goods or services, or a portion thereof, for which it is registered, or has been abandoned, or its registration was obtained fraudulently or contrary to the provisions of the IP Code, or if the registered mark is being used by, or with the permission of, the registrant so as to misrepresent the source of the goods or services on or in connection with which the mark is used. If the registered mark becomes the generic name for less than all of the goods or services for which it is registered, a petition to cancel the registration for only those goods or services may be filed. A registered mark shall not be deemed to be the generic name of goods or services solely because such mark is also used as a name of or to identify a unique product or service. The primary significance of the registered mark to the relevant public rather than purchaser motivation shall be the test for determining whether the registered mark has become the generic name of goods or services on or in connection with which it has been used. Evidence on purchaser motivation shall not be admitted; (c) At any time, if the registered owner of the mark without legitimate reason fails to use the mark within the Philippines, or to cause it to be used in the Philippines by virtue of a license during an uninterrupted period of at least three years. - 特許庁

第二百四十九条　信託法第百十四条（議決権の代理行使）、第百十七条（議決権の不統一行使）、第百十八条第二項（受託者の出席等）、第百十九条（延期又は続行の決議）及び第百二十条（議事録）並びに会社法第三百十四条（取締役等の説明義務）、第三百十五条（議長の権限）、第七百三十一条（第一項を除く。）（議事録）、第七百三十二条から第七百三十五条まで（社債権者集会の決議の認可の申立て、社債権者集会の決議の不認可、社債権者集会の決議の効力、社債権者集会の決議の認可又は不認可の決定の公告）及び第七百三十八条（代表社債権者等の解任等）の規定は、権利者集会について準用する。この場合において、信託法第百十九条中「第百八条及び第百九条」とあるのは「資産流動化法第二百四十二条」と、会社法第三百十四条中「取締役、会計参与、監査役及び執行役」とあるのは「受託信託会社等」と、同法第七百三十一条第二項中「社債発行会社」とあるのは「受託信託会社等」と、同条第三項中「社債管理者及び社債権者」とあるのは「代表権利者、特定信託管理者及び各受益証券の権利者」と、「社債発行会社」とあるのは「受託信託会社等」と、同法第七百三十三条第一号中「第六百七十六条の募集」とあるのは「受益証券の募集」と、「当該社債発行会社」とあるのは「受託信託会社等」と、同法第七百三十五条中「社債発行会社」とあるのは「受託信託会社等」と、同法第七百三十八条中「代表社債権者若しくは決議執行者」とあるのは「資産流動化法第二百四十六条第一項の決議により定めた者」と読み替えるものとするほか、必要な技術的読替えは、政令で定める。例文帳に追加

Article 249 (1) The provisions of Article 114 (Proxy Voting), Article 117 (Inconsistent Voting), Article 118(2) (Attendance of Beneficiaries, etc.), Article 119 (Resolutions for Postponement or Continuation), and Article 120 (Minutes of a Meeting) of the Trust Act and the provisions of Article 314 (Accountability of the Directors, etc.), Article 315 (Authority of the Chairperson), Article 731 (excluding paragraph (1)) (Minutes of a Meeting), Articles 732 to 735 inclusive (Petitions for Approval of Resolutions Made at Bondholders' Meetings; Rejection of Resolutions Made at Bondholders' Meetings; Effectiveness of Resolutions Made at Bondholders' Meetings; Public Notice of Rulings Approving or Rejecting Resolutions Made at Bondholders' Meetings), and Article 738 (Dismissal of Representative Bondholders) of the Companies Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to Beneficiary Certificate Holders' Meetings. In this case, the phrase "Article 108 and Article 109" in Article 119 of the Trust Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "Article 242 of the Asset Securitization Act," the phrase "a director, an accounting advisor, a company auditor or an executive officer" in Article 314 of the Companies Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a Fiduciary Trust Company, etc.," the term "bond-issuing Company" in Article 731(2) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "Fiduciary Trust Company, etc.," the phrase "The bond manager and bondholders" in paragraph (3) of that Article shall be deemed to be replaced with "The Representative Beneficiary Certificate Holder, the Specified Trust Administrator, and each Beneficiary Certificate Holder," the term "Bond-issuing Company" in that paragraph shall be deemed to be replaced with "Fiduciary Trust Company, etc.," the phrase "the solicitation in Article 676" in Article 733(i) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "the solicitation for Beneficiary Certificates," the term "such bond-issuing Company" in that item shall be deemed to be replaced with "the Fiduciary Trust Company, etc.," the term "bond-issuing Company" in Article 735 of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "Fiduciary Trust Company, etc.," the phrase "the representative bondholders or Resolution Administrator" in Article 738 of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "the person specified by the resolution set forth in Article 246(1) of the Asset Securitization Act," and any other necessary technical replacement of terms shall be specified by a Cabinet Order.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

第五十六条　特許法第百三十一条第一項、第百三十一条の二第一項、第百三十二条から第百三十三条の二まで、第百三十四条第一項、第三項及び第四項、第百三十五条から第百五十四条まで、第百五十五条第一項及び第二項、第百五十六条から第百五十八条まで、第百六十条第一項及び第二項、第百六十一条並びに第百六十七条から第百七十条まで（審決の効果、審判の請求、審判官、審判の手続、訴訟との関係及び審判における費用）の規定は、審判に準用する。この場合において、同法第百三十一条の二第一項中「特許無効審判以外の審判を請求する場合における同項第三号に掲げる請求の理由についてされるとき、又は次項の規定による審判長の許可があつたとき」とあるのは「商標法第四十六条第一項の審判以外の審判を請求する場合における同法第五十六条第一項において準用する特許法第百三十一条第一項第三号に掲げる請求の理由についてされるとき」と、同法第百三十二条第一項及び第百六十七条中「特許無効審判又は延長登録無効審判」とあり、並びに同法第百四十五条第一項及び第百六十九条第一項中「特許無効審判及び延長登録無効審判」とあるのは「商標法第四十六条第一項、第五十条第一項、第五十一条第一項、第五十二条の二第一項、第五十三条第一項又は第五十三条の二の審判」と、同法第百三十九条第一号、第二号及び第五号中「当事者若しくは参加人」とあるのは「当事者、参加人若しくは登録異議申立人」と、同条第三号中「当事者又は参加人」とあるのは「当事者、参加人又は登録異議申立人」と、同法第百六十一条中「拒絶査定不服審判」とあり、及び同法第百六十九条第三項中「拒絶査定不服審判及び訂正審判」とあるのは「商標法第四十四条第一項又は第四十五条第一項の審判」と、同法第百六十八条第一項中「他の審判の審決」とあるのは「登録異議の申立てについての決定若しくは他の審判の審決」と読み替えるものとする。例文帳に追加

Article 56 (1) The provisions of Articles 131(1), 131-2(1), 132 to 133-2, 134(1), 134(3), 134(4), 135 to 154, 155(1), 155(2), 156 to 158, 160(1), 160(2), 161, and 167 to 170 (effect of trial decision, request for trial, trial examiner, trial procedures in relation to litigation, and costs of trial) of the Patent Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to a trial. In this case, the term "is made with respect to the grounds for the request as provided in item (iii) of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article in the course of filing a request for a trial other than a trial for Patent invalidation, or in the event that approval is granted by the chief trial examiner under the following paragraph" in Article131-2(1) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "is made with respect to the grounds for the request as provided in Article 131(1)(iii) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 56(1) of this Act in the course of filing a request for a trial other than a trial under Article 46(1) of the Trademark Act," the term "a trial for Patent invalidation and a trial for invalidation of the registration of extension of term" in Articles 132(1) and 167 of the Patent Act and the term "a trial for Patent invalidation or a trial for invalidation of the registration of extension of term" in Articles 145(1) and 169(1) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a trial under Article 46(1), 50(1), 51(1), 52-2(1), 53(1) or 53-2 of the Trademark Act," the term "a party in the case or an intervener in the case" in Article 139(i), (ii) and (v) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a party in the case, an intervener in the case or an opponent to the registration in the case", the term "a party in the case or an intervener in the case" in Article 139(iii) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a party in the case, an intervener in the case or an opponent to the registration in the case," the term "a trial against the examiner's decision of refusal" in Article 161 of the Patent Act and "a trial against an examiner's decision of refusal and a trial for correction" in Article 169(3) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a trial under Article 44(1) or 45(1) of the Trademark Act," and the term "the decision in another trial" in Article 168(1) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "a decision on the opposition to registration or a trial decision in another trial."  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

２　特許法第六条から第九条まで、第十一条から第十六条まで、第十七条第三項及び第四項、第十八条から第二十四条まで並びに第百九十四条（手続）の規定は、商標登録出願、防護標章登録出願、請求その他商標登録又は防護標章登録に関する手続に準用する。この場合において、同法第六条第一項第一号中「出願審査の請求」とあるのは「登録異議の申立て」と、同法第七条第四項中「相手方が請求した審判又は再審」とあるのは「その商標権若しくは防護標章登録に基づく権利に係る登録異議の申立て又は相手方が請求した審判若しくは再審」と、同法第九条中「拒絶査定不服審判」とあるのは「商標法第四十四条第一項若しくは第四十五条第一項の審判」と、同法第十四条中「拒絶査定不服審判」とあるのは「商標法第四十四条第一項又は第四十五条第一項の審判」と、同法第十七条第三項中「二　手続がこの法律又はこの法律に基づく命令で定める方式に違反しているとき。」とあるのは「二　手続がこの法律又はこの法律に基づく命令で定める方式に違反しているとき。二の二　手続について商標法第四十条第二項の規定による登録料又は同法第四十一条の二第二項の規定により更新登録の申請と同時に納付すべき登録料（商標法第四十三条第一項又は第二項の規定により納付すべき割増登録料を含む。）を納付しないとき。」と、同法第十八条の二第一項中「できないもの」とあるのは「できないもの（商標法第五条の二第一項各号（同法第六十八条第一項において準用する場合を含む。）に該当するものを除く。）」と、同法第二十三条第一項及び第二十四条中「審判」とあるのは「登録異議の申立てについての審理及び決定、審判」と、同法第百九十四条第一項中「審判」とあるのは「登録異議の申立て、審判」と読み替えるものとする。例文帳に追加

(2) Articles 6 to 9, 11 to 16, 17(3) and 17(4), 18 to 24 and 194 (procedures) of the Patent Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to an application for trademark registration, an application for defensive mark registration, any petitions or any other procedures pertaining to trademark registration or defensive mark registration. In this case, the portion "file a request for the examination of an application" in Article 6(1)(i) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "file an opposition to registration," the portion "an adverse party files a petition for a trial or retrial" in Article 7(4) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "an opposition to registration in relation to the trademark right or the right based on defensive mark registration is filed or a trial or retrial is filed by an adverse party," the portion "trial against an examiner's decision of refusal" in Article 9 of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "trial under Article 44(1) or 45(1) of the Trademark Act," the portion "trial against an examiner's decision of refusal" in Article 14 of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "trial under Article 44(1) or 45(1) of the Trademark Act," the portion "(ii) where the procedures do not comply with the formal requirements provided by this Act or an order thereunder" in Article 17(3) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "(ii) where the procedures do not comply with the formal requirements provided by this Act or an order thereunder; (ii)-2 where, pertaining to the procedures, the registration fee under Article 40(2) of the Trademark Act or the registration fee (including the registration surcharge due and payable pursuant to Article 43(1) or 43(2) of the Trademark Act) payable at the time of application for registration of renewal pursuant to Article 41-2(2) of the Trademark Act is not paid," the portion "not amendable" in Article 18-2(1) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "not amendable (except cases filing under any of the items in Article 5-2(1) of the Trademark Act (including cases where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 68(1) of the Trademark Act))," the term "trial" in Article 23(1) and 24 of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "examination and decision on an opposition to registration, trial" and the term "trial" in Article 194(1) of the Patent Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "opposition to registration, trial."  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

第151条 取消 151.1本法による標章の登録により損害を受けている又は損害を受けるであろうと考える者は，法律局に対して当該標章登録の取消の請求をすることができる。ただし，次の条件に従う。 (a)取消の請求は，本法に基づく当該標章の登録日から5年以内にしなければならない。 (b)取消の請求は，当該登録標章が登録に係る商品若しくはサ－ビス若しくはその一部について一般名称になっているか若しくは放棄されている場合，当該登録が不正に得られたか若しくは本法の規定に反してなされた場合，又は権利者により若しくは権利者の承認のもとに当該登録標章が商品若しくはサ－ビスの出所を偽って表示するように使用されている場合は，いつでもすることができる。登録標章が登録に係る商品又はサ－ビスの一部について一般名称になっている場合は，当該一部の商品又はサ－ビスについてのみ取消の請求をすることができる。登録標章は，当該標章がある独特の商品若しくはサ－ビスの名称としても又はある独特の商品若しくはサ－ビスを特定するためにも使用されているということのみを理由としては，商品又はサ－ビスの一般名称であるとはみなさない。登録標章が当該標章を使用している商品又はサ－ビスの一般名称になっているか否かを決定するに当たっては，購入者の購入の動機ではなく，関連する公衆にとっての当該標章の主要な意味が基準になる。 (c)取消の請求は，権利者が正当な理由なくして3年以上継続してフィリピンにおいて当該標章を使用しなかったか又はライセンスによりフィリピンにおいて使用させることをしなかった場合は，いつでもすることができる。例文帳に追加

Sec.151 Cancellation 151.1. A petition to cancel a registration of a mark under this Act may be filed with the Bureau of Legal Affairs by any person who believes that he is or will be damaged by the registration of a mark under this Act, as follows: (a) Within five years from the date of the registration of the mark under this Act. (b) At any time, if the registered mark becomes the generic name for the goods or services, or a portion thereof, for which it is registered, or has been abandoned, or its registration was obtained fraudulently or contrary to the provisions of this Act, or if the registered mark is being used by, or with the permission of, the registrant so as to misrepresent the source of the goods or services on or in connection with which the mark is used. If the registered mark becomes the generic name for less than all of the goods or services for which it is registered, a petition to cancel the registration for only those goods or services may be filed. A registered mark shall not be deemed to be the generic name of goods or services solely because such mark is also used as a name of or to identify a unique product or service. The primary significance of the registered mark to the relevant public rather than purchaser motivation shall be the test for determining whether the registered mark has become the generic name of goods or services on or in connection with which it has been used. (c) At any time, if the registered owner of the mark without legitimate reason fails to use the mark within the Philippines, or to cause it to be used in the Philippines by virtue of a license during an uninterrupted period of three years or longer. - 特許庁

３　会社法第六十七条第一項（創立総会の招集の決定）、第六十八条（第二項各号及び第五項から第七項までを除く。）（創立総会の招集の通知）、第七十条、第七十一条（創立総会参考書類及び議決権行使書面の交付等）、第七十四条から第七十六条まで（議決権の代理行使、書面による議決権の行使、電磁的方法による議決権の行使）、第七十八条から第八十条まで（発起人の説明義務、議長の権限、延期又は続行の決議）、第八十一条第一項から第三項まで（議事録）及び第三百十六条第一項（株主総会に提出された資料等の調査）の規定は保険契約者総会について、同法第八百三十条（株主総会等の決議の不存在又は無効の確認の訴え）、第八百三十一条（株主総会等の決議の取消しの訴え）、第八百三十四条（第十六号及び第十七号に係る部分に限る。）（被告）、第八百三十五条第一項（訴えの管轄）、第八百三十六条第一項及び第三項（担保提供命令）、第八百三十七条（弁論等の必要的併合）、第八百三十八条（認容判決の効力が及ぶ者の範囲）、第八百四十六条（原告が敗訴した場合の損害賠償責任）並びに第九百三十七条第一項（第一号トに係る部分に限る。）（裁判による登記の嘱託）の規定は保険契約者総会の決議の不存在若しくは無効の確認又は取消しの訴えについて、それぞれ準用する。この場合において、これらの規定中「発起人」とあるのは「組織変更をする株式会社」と、「設立時株主」とあるのは「保険契約者」と、「株式会社」とあるのは「相互会社」と、同法第六十八条第二項中「次に掲げる場合には、前項」とあるのは「前項」と、同法第七十四条第六項中「本店」とあるのは「主たる事務所」と、同条第七項中「株主」とあるのは「社員」と、同法第八百三十一条第一項中「株主等（当該各号の株主総会等が創立総会又は種類創立総会である場合にあっては、株主等、設立時株主、設立時取締役又は設立時監査役）」とあるのは「保険契約者、取締役、監査役又は清算人（委員会設置会社にあっては、保険契約者、取締役、執行役又は清算人）」と、「取締役、監査役又は清算人（当該決議が株主総会又は種類株主総会の決議である場合にあっては第三百四十六条第一項（第四百七十九条第四項において準用する場合を含む。）の規定により取締役、監査役又は清算人としての権利義務を有する者を含み、当該決議が創立総会又は種類創立総会の決議である場合にあっては設立時取締役又は設立時監査役を含む。）」とあるのは「取締役、監査役又は清算人」と読み替えるものとするほか、必要な技術的読替えは、政令で定める。例文帳に追加

(3) The provisions of Article 67, paragraph (1) (Determination to Call Organizational Meetings), Article 68 (excluding the items in paragraph (2) and paragraphs (5) to (7) inclusive) (Notices of Calling of Organizational Meetings), Articles 70 and 71 (Giving of Organizational Meeting Reference Documents and Voting Forms), Article 74 to 76 inclusive (Proxy Voting, Voting in Writing, Voting by Electromagnetic Method), Article 78 to 80 inclusive (Accountability of Incorporators, Authority of Chairperson, Resolution for Postponement or Adjournment), Article 81, paragraphs (1) to (3) inclusive (Minutes) and Article 316, paragraph (1) (Investigation of Materials Submitted to the Shareholders Meeting) of the Companies Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the policyholders meeting; and the provisions of Article 830 (Action for Declaratory Judgment on Nonexistence or Nullity of Resolution of Shareholders Meeting, etc.), Article 831 (Lawsuit for Rescission of Resolution of Shareholders Meeting, etc.), Article 834 (limited to the segment pertaining to items (xvi) and (xvii)) (Defendant), Article 835, paragraph (1) (Jurisdiction of Claim), Article 836, paragraphs (1) and (3) (Order to Furnish Security), Article 837 (Compulsory Consolidation of Oral Arguments, etc.), Article 838 (Scope of Effect of Judgment in Favor of Claim), Article 846 (Liability for Damages in Case of Defeat of Plaintiff), and Article 937, paragraph (1) (limited to the segment pertaining to item (i), (g)) (Commission of Registration by Judicial Decision) of that Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to an action for a declaratory judgment on nonexistence or nullity of, or rescission of a resolution of the policyholders meeting. In this case, the terms "incorporators", "shareholders at incorporation" and "Stock Company" in those provisions shall be deemed to be replaced with "converting Stock Company," "policyholders" and "Mutual Company," respectively; the term "in the following cases" in Article 68, paragraph (2) of that Act shall be deemed to be deleted; the term "head office" in Article 74, paragraph (6) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "principal office"; the term "shareholders" in Article 74, paragraph (7) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "members"; and the terms "shareholders, etc. (or shareholders, etc., shareholders at incorporation, directors at incorporation or company auditors at incorporation, where the shareholders meeting, etc. in the relevant item is the Organizational Meeting or class organizational meeting)" and "directors, company auditors or liquidators (including, where the resolution is a resolution of the shareholders meeting or class meeting, a person assuming the rights and obligations of a director, company auditor or liquidator pursuant to the provision of Article 346, paragraph (1) (including the cases where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 479, paragraph (4)), or, where the resolution is a resolution of the Organizational Meeting or class organizational meeting, directors at incorporation or company auditors at incorporation)" in Article 831, paragraph (1) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "policyholders, directors, company auditors or liquidators (or, in a company with Committees, Policyholders, directors, executive officers or liquidators" and "directors, company auditors or liquidators," respectively; any other necessary technical change in interpretation shall be specified by a Cabinet Order.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

ロ　執行裁判所の執行処分に対する執行異議の申立て、民事執行法第十三条第一項の代理人の選任の許可を求める申立て、執行文の付与の申立てに関する処分に対する異議の申立て、同法第三十六条第一項若しくは第三項の規定による強制執行の停止若しくは続行を命じ、若しくは執行処分の取消しを命ずる裁判を求める申立て、同法第四十一条第二項の規定による特別代理人の選任の申立て、同法第四十七条第四項若しくは第四十九条第五項の規定による裁判所書記官の処分に対する異議の申立て、執行裁判所に対する配当要求、同法第五十五条第一項の規定による売却のための保全処分若しくは同条第五項の規定によるその取消し若しくは変更の申立て、同法第五十六条第一項の規定による地代等の代払の許可を求める申立て、同法第六十二条第三項若しくは第六十四条第六項の規定による裁判所書記官の処分に対する異議の申立て、同法第六十八条の二第一項の規定による買受けの申出をした差押債権者のための保全処分の申立て、同法第七十七条第一項の規定による最高価買受申出人若しくは買受人のための保全処分の申立て、同法第七十八条第六項の規定による裁判所書記官の処分に対する異議の申立て、同法第八十三条第一項の規定による不動産の引渡命令の申立て、同法第百十五条第一項の規定による船舶国籍証書等の引渡命令の申立て、同法第百十七条第一項の規定による強制競売の手続の取消しの申立て、同法第百十八条第一項の規定による船舶の航行の許可を求める申立て、同法第百二十七条第一項の規定による差押物の引渡命令の申立て、少額訴訟債権執行の手続における裁判所書記官の執行処分に対する執行異議の申立て、少額訴訟債権執行の手続における裁判所書記官に対する配当要求、同法第百六十七条の十五第三項の規定による申立て、同法第百七十二条第二項の規定による申立て、同法第百八十七条第一項の規定による担保不動産競売の開始決定前の保全処分若しくは同条第四項の規定によるその取消しの申立て又は同法第百九十条第二項の動産競売の開始の許可の申立て例文帳に追加

(b) The filing of an objection to a disposition of execution by the executing court, a petition seeking permission for the appointment of an agent set forth in Article 13, paragraph (1) of the Civil Execution Act, an objection to a disposition concerning a petition for a grant of a certificate of execution, a petition for a judicial decision ordering a stay or a continuation of a compulsory execution or ordering a revocation of a disposition of execution under the provisions of Article 36, paragraph (1) or paragraph (3) of said Act, a petition for appointment of a special agent under the provisions of Article 41, paragraph (2) of said Act, an objection to a disposition by a court clerk under the provisions of Article 47, paragraph (4) or Article 49, paragraph (5) of said Act, a demand for liquidation distribution by the executing court, a petition for a temporary restraining order on a sale under the provisions of Article 55, paragraph (1) of said Act or for a revocation or change of such an order under the provisions of paragraph (5) of said Article, a petition for permission to pay rent on land, etc. in place of the obligor under the provisions of Article 56, paragraph (1) of said Act, an objection to a disposition by a court clerk under the provisions of Article 62, paragraph (3) or Article 64, paragraph (6) of said Act, a petition for a temporary restraining order for an obligee effecting a seizure who has made a purchase offer under the provisions of Article 68-2, paragraph (1) of said Act, a petition for a temporary restraining order for the highest purchase price offeror or the purchaser under the provisions of Article 77, paragraph (1) of said Act, an objection to a disposition by a court clerk under the provisions of Article 78, paragraph (6) of said Act, a petition for an order to deliver real property under the provisions of Article 83, paragraph (1) of said Act, a petition for an order to deliver the certificate of a vessel's nationality, etc. under the provisions of Article 115, paragraph (1) of said Act, a petition for the rescission of a compulsory auction procedure under the provisions of Article 117, paragraph (1) of said Act, a petition for permission for navigation of a vessel under the provisions of Article 118, paragraph (1) of said Act, a petition for an order to deliver seized property under the provisions of Article 127, paragraph (1) of said Act; an objection to a disposition of execution by a court clerk in the procedure of executing a claim relating to a small claim action, a demand on a court clerk for liquidation distribution during the process of executing a claim relating to a small claim action, a petition under the provisions of Article 167-15, paragraph (3) of said Act, a petition under the provisions of Article 172, paragraph (2) of said Act, a petition for a temporary restraining order prior to a commencement order for a secured real property auction under Article 187, paragraph (1) of said Act or for revocation of such an order under the provisions of Article 187, paragraph (4), or a petition for permission to commence an auction of movables as set forth in Article 190, paragraph (2) of said Act  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

第五十三条の十五　会社法第三百五十条（代表者の行為についての損害賠償責任）、第三百五十二条（取締役の職務を代行する者の権限）、第三百五十四条から第三百五十七条まで（表見代表取締役、忠実義務、競業及び利益相反取引の制限、取締役の報告義務）、第三百五十八条（第一項第二号を除く。）（業務の執行に関する検査役の選任）、第三百五十九条（裁判所による株主総会招集等の決定）、第三百六十条第一項（株主による取締役の行為の差止め）、第三百六十一条（取締役の報酬等）及び第三百六十五条第二項（競業及び取締役会設置会社との取引等の制限）の規定は相互会社の取締役について、同法第三百四十九条第四項及び第五項（株式会社の代表）並びに第三百五十一条（代表取締役に欠員を生じた場合の措置）の規定は相互会社の代表取締役について、同法第八百六十八条第一項（非訟事件の管轄）、第八百六十九条（疎明）、第八百七十条（第二号に係る部分に限る。）（陳述の聴取）、第八百七十一条（理由の付記）、第八百七十二条（第四号に係る部分に限る。）（即時抗告）、第八百七十四条（第一号及び第四号に係る部分に限る。）（不服申立ての制限）、第八百七十五条（非訟事件手続法の規定の適用除外）及び第八百七十六条（最高裁判所規則）の規定は相互会社の取締役又は代表取締役について、同法第九百三十七条第一項（第二号イ及びハに係る部分に限る。）（裁判による登記の嘱託）の規定は相互会社の代表取締役について、それぞれ準用する。この場合において、同法第三百五十六条第一項中「株主総会」とあるのは「取締役会」と、同法第三百五十八条第一項中「株主は」とあるのは「社員又は総代は」と、同項第一号中「総株主（株主総会において決議をすることができる事項の全部につき議決権を行使することができない株主を除く。）の議決権の百分の三（これを下回る割合を定款で定めた場合にあっては、その割合）以上の議決権を有する株主」とあるのは「社員総数の千分の三（これを下回る割合を定款で定めた場合にあっては、その割合）以上に相当する数の社員又は三千名（これを下回る数を定款で定めた場合にあっては、その数）以上の社員（特定相互会社にあっては、保険業法第三十八条第一項に規定する政令で定める数以上の社員）で六箇月（これを下回る期間を定款で定めた場合にあっては、その期間）前から引き続いて社員である者（総代会を設けているときは、これらの者又は九名（これを下回る数を定款で定めた場合にあっては、その数）以上の総代）」と、同条第七項中「株主」とあるのは「社員又は総代」と、同法第三百五十九条第一項第二号中「株主」とあるのは「社員（総代会を設けているときは、総代）」と、同法第三百六十条第一項中「株式を有する株主」とあるのは「社員である者」と、「著しい損害」とあるのは「回復することができない損害」と読み替えるものとするほか、必要な技術的読替えは、政令で定める。例文帳に追加

Article 53-15 The provisions of Article 350 (Liability for Damages Caused by Acts of Directors), Article 352 (Authority of Persons Who Perform Duties on Behalf of Directors), Article 354 to 357 inclusive (Apparent Representative Directors, Duty of Loyalty, Restrictions on Competition and Conflict of Interest Transactions, Director's Duty to Report), Article 358 (excluding paragraph (1), item (ii)) (Election of Inspector of Execution of Operation), Article 359 (Decision by Court to Call Shareholders Meeting), Article 360, paragraph (1) (Enjoinment of Acts of Directors by Shareholders), Article 361 (Remuneration for Directors) and Article 365, paragraph (2) (Restrictions on Competition and Transactions with Companies with a Board of Directors) of the Companies Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the directors of a Mutual Company; the provisions of Article 349, paragraphs (4) and (5) (Representatives of Companies), and Article 351 (Measures When Vacancy Arises in Office of Representative Director) of that Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the representative director of a Mutual Company; the provisions of Article 868, paragraph (1) (Jurisdiction of Non-Contentious Cases), Article 869 (Showing of Prima Facie Evidence), Article 870 (limited to the segment pertaining to item (ii)) (Hearing of Statements), Article 871 (Supplementary Note of Reasons), Article 872 (limited to the segment pertaining to item (iv)) (Immediate Appeal Against Ruling), Article 874 (limited to the segment pertaining to items (i) and (iv)) (Restrictions on Appeal), Article 875 (Exclusion from Application of Provisions of Act on Procedures for Non-Contentious Cases) and Article 876 (Supreme Court Rules) of that Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the directors or representative director of a Mutual Company; and the provision of Article 937, paragraph (1) (limited to the segment pertaining to item (ii), (a) and (c)) (Commission of Registration by Judicial Decision) of that Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the representative director of a Mutual Company. In this case, the term "shareholders meeting" in Article 356, paragraph (1) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "board of directors"; the term "shareholders" in Article 358, paragraph (1) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "members or general representatives"; the term "Shareholders who hold not less than three hundredths of the votes (or, in cases where a lesser proportion is prescribed in the articles of incorporation, such proportion) of all shareholders (excluding shareholders who may not exercise their votes on all matters which may be resolved at shareholders meetings)" in Article 358, paragraph (1), item (i) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "Members representing at least three thousandths (or any smaller proportion prescribed by the articles of incorporation) of the total membership, or three thousand (or any smaller number prescribed by the articles of incorporation) or more members of a Mutual Company (or, in a Specified Mutual Company, members equal to or exceeding the number specified by a Cabinet Order set forth in Article 38, paragraph (1) of the Insurance Business Act), who have been members of the Mutual Company without interruption for the preceding six months (or any shorter period prescribed by the articles of incorporation) (or, where the company has a General Meeting, those persons, or nine (or any other smaller number prescribed by the articles of incorporation) or more general representatives)"; the term "shareholders" in Article 358, paragraph (7) shall be deemed to be replaced with "members or general representatives"; the term "shareholders" in Article 359, paragraph (1), item (ii) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "members (or, where the company has a General Meeting, general representatives)"; and the terms "shareholders having the shares" and "substantial detriment" in Article 360, paragraph (1) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "persons who have been members" and "irreparable damages," respectively; any other necessary technical change in interpretation shall be prescribed by a Cabinet Order.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム

６　会社法第六十七条（創立総会の招集の決定）、第六十八条（第二項各号を除く。）（創立総会の招集の通知）、第七十条、第七十一条（創立総会参考書類及び議決権行使書面の交付等）、第七十三条第四項（創立総会の決議）、第七十四条から第七十六条まで（議決権の代理行使、書面による議決権の行使、電磁的方法による議決権の行使）、第七十八条から第八十条まで（発起人の説明義務、議長の権限、延期又は続行の決議）及び第八十一条（第四項を除く。）（議事録）の規定は相互会社の創立総会について、同法第八百三十条（株主総会等の決議の不存在又は無効の確認の訴え）、第八百三十一条（株主総会等の決議の取消しの訴え）、第八百三十四条（第十六号及び第十七号に係る部分に限る。）（被告）、第八百三十五条第一項（訴えの管轄）、第八百三十六条第一項及び第三項（担保提供命令）、第八百三十七条（弁論等の必要的併合）、第八百三十八条（認容判決の効力が及ぶ者の範囲）、第八百四十六条（原告が敗訴した場合の損害賠償責任）並びに第九百三十七条第一項（第一号トに係る部分に限る。）（裁判による登記の嘱託）の規定は相互会社の創立総会の決議の不存在若しくは無効の確認又は取消しの訴えについて、それぞれ準用する。この場合において、これらの規定（同法第六十七条第二項及び第八百三十一条第一項を除く。）中「設立時株主」とあり、及び同法第六十七条第二項中「設立時株主（創立総会において決議をすることができる事項の全部につき議決権を行使することができない設立時株主を除く。次条から第七十一条までにおいて同じ。）」とあるのは「社員になろうとする者」と、同法第六十八条第一項中「二週間（前条第一項第三号又は第四号に掲げる事項を定めたときを除き、設立しようとする株式会社が公開会社でない場合にあっては、一週間（当該設立しようとする株式会社が取締役会設置会社以外の株式会社である場合において、これを下回る期間を定款で定めた場合にあっては、その期間））」とあるのは「二週間」と、同条第二項中「次に掲げる場合には、前項」とあるのは「前項」と、同条第五項中「第二十七条第五号又は第五十九条第三項第一号」とあるのは「保険業法第三十条の七第二項第一号」と、同法第八百三十一条第一項中「株主等（当該各号の株主総会等が創立総会又は種類創立総会である場合にあっては、株主等、設立時株主、設立時取締役又は設立時監査役）」とあるのは「相互会社の社員、取締役、監査役若しくは清算人（委員会設置会社にあっては、社員、取締役、執行役又は清算人）又は社員になろうとする者、設立時取締役（保険業法第三十条の十第一項に規定する設立時取締役をいう。以下この項において同じ。）若しくは設立時監査役（同条第一項に規定する設立時監査役をいう。以下この項において同じ。）」と、「取締役、監査役又は清算人（当該決議が株主総会又は種類株主総会の決議である場合にあっては第三百四十六条第一項（第四百七十九条第四項において準用する場合を含む。）の規定により取締役、監査役又は清算人としての権利義務を有する者を含み、当該決議が創立総会又は種類創立総会の決議である場合にあっては設立時取締役又は設立時監査役を含む。）」とあるのは「取締役、監査役、清算人、設立時取締役又は設立時監査役」と読み替えるものとするほか、必要な技術的読替えは、政令で定める。例文帳に追加

(6) The provisions of Article 67 (Determinations to Call Organizational Meetings), Article 68 (excluding items in paragraph (2)) (Notices of Calling of Organizational Meetings), Articles 70 and Article 71 (Giving of Organizational Meeting Reference Documents and Voting Forms), Article 73, paragraph (4) (Resolutions of Organizational Meetings), Article 74 to 76 inclusive (Proxy Voting, Voting in Writing, Voting by Electromagnetic Means), Article 78 to 80 inclusive (Accountability of Incorporators, Authority of Chairperson, Resolution for Postponement or Adjournment), and Article 81 (excluding paragraph (4)) (Minutes) of the Companies Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the Organizational Meeting of a Mutual Company; and the provisions of Article 830 (Action for Declaratory Judgment on Nonexistence or Nullity of Resolution of Shareholders Meeting, etc.), Article 831 (Lawsuit for Rescission of Resolution of Shareholders Meeting, etc.), Article 834 (limited to the segment pertaining to items (xvi) and (xvii)) (Defendant), Article 835, paragraph (1) (Jurisdiction of Claim), Article 836, paragraphs (1) and (3) (Order to Furnish Security), Article 837 (Compulsory Consolidation of Oral Arguments, etc.), Article 838 (Scope of Effect of Judgment in Favor of Claim), Article 846 (Liability for Damages in Case of Defeat of Plaintiff), and Article 937, paragraph (1) (limited to the segment pertaining to item (i), (g)) (Commission of Registration by Judicial Decision) of that Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to an action for a declaratory judgment on nonexistence or nullity of, or rescission of a resolution of a Mutual Company's Organizational Meeting, respectively. In this case, the terms "Shareholders at Incorporation" in those provisions (excluding Article 67, paragraph (2) and Article 831, paragraph (1) of that Act), and "Shareholders at Incorporation (excluding Shareholders at Incorporation who may not exercise votes on all matters which may be resolved at Organizational Meetings. The same shall apply in the following Article to Article 71 inclusive.)" in Article 67, paragraph (2) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "prospective members;" the term "two weeks (or one week if the Stock Company to be incorporated is not a Public Company, except in cases where the matters listed in paragraph (1), item (iii) or (iv) of the preceding Article are decided, (or if a shorter period of time is provided for in the articles of incorporation in cases where the Stock Company to be incorporated is a Stock Company other than a Company with Board of Directors, such shorter period of time))" in Article 68, paragraph (1) of that Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "two weeks;" the term "shall be in writing in the following cases" in Article 68, paragraph (2) shall be deemed to be replaced with "shall be in writing;" the term "Article 27, item (v), or Article 59, paragraph (3), item (i)" in Article 68, paragraph (5) shall be deemed to be replaced with "Article 30-7, paragraph (2), item (i) of the Insurance Business Act;" the term "shareholders, etc. (or, shareholders, etc., shareholders at incorporation, directors at incorporation or company auditors at incorporation where the shareholder meeting, etc. set forth in the relevant item is an Organizational Meeting or class Organizational Meeting" in Article 831, paragraph (1) shall be deemed to be replaced with "members, directors, auditors or liquidators (or, members, directors, executive officers or liquidators in a company with Committees), or prospective members, directors at incorporation (referring to the directors at incorporation set forth in Article 30-10, paragraph (1) of the Insurance Business Act; hereinafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) or company auditors at incorporation (referring to the company auditors at incorporation set forth in paragraph (1) of that Article; hereinafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) of a Mutual Company;" and the term" directors, company auditors or liquidators (including a person who has the rights and obligations of a director, company auditor or liquidator pursuant to the provision of Article 346, paragraph (1) (including the cases where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 479, paragraph (4)) where the resolution is a resolution of the shareholders meeting or class meeting, and including directors at incorporation or company auditors at incorporation where the resolution is a resolution of the Organizational Meeting or class Organizational Meeting" in the same paragraph of the Companies Act shall be deemed to be replaced with "directors, company auditors, liquidators, directors at incorporation or company auditors at incorporation;", and any other necessary technical change in interpretation shall be specified by a Cabinet Order.  - 日本法令外国語訳データベースシステム