Sentence examples for basis for review from inspiring English sources

Judges customarily explain their decisions in written rulings as a basis for review by other judges, which is important to bolster the perception of fairness.

To lay the basis for review here, Congress amended § 16 so as to terminate the administrative oversight of the Court of Appeals.

But, because our own jurisdiction is cast in terms of 'case or controversy,' we cannot accept as the basis for review, nor as the basis for conclusive disposition of an issue of federal law without review, any procedure which does not constitute such.

Documentation also provides the basis for review and updating of functions when further volcanic impact data becomes available.

If prepublication review is anticipated, this criterion requires prior delineation of the permissible basis for review and applicable time limits.

It would also provide a very valuable basis for programme evaluations, which could draw on this information as an important basis for review and validation.

They have asserted that this position would provide an objective basis for reviewing state activities and would promote a desirable uniformity between state and federal rights and sanctions.

This method presents an effective basis for reviewing the impact of design decisions on the design process.

May sought to reassure MPs about the customs backstop arrangements, intended to prevent a hard Irish border if a permanent deal is not reached in time, saying the clear expectation was that it would not be needed, and if it was, the legal basis for reviewing how it would end was clear.

There is no reason to cons der whether the petitioner could properly be remitted 'to further administrative proceedings under the 1960 regulation' (ante, p. 153), or whether the 1960 regulation provides 'a reasonable basis for reviewing petitioner's rights under the 1955 regulation' (ante, p. 163).

In view of the substantial differences between the two regulations and in view of the additional factual determinations that would be relevant under the 1960 regulation but irrelevant under the 1955 regulation, we conclude the 1960 regulation does not provide a reasonable basis for reviewing petitioner's rights under the 1955 regulation.