.....

[mehrasa]

The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated, the accident would not have occurred.

a) The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated
b) The courts ruled that had there being safety protocols initiated
c) The courts rule that had there been safety protocols initiated
d) The courts ruled that had there been safety protocols initiated
e) The courts ruled that have there been safety protocols initiated

please explain its relevant grammer

[chetansharma]

The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated, the accident would not have occurred.

a) The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated
b) The courts ruled that had there being safety protocols initiated
c) The courts rule that had there been safety protocols initiated
d) The courts ruled that had there been safety protocols initiated
e) The courts ruled that have there been safety protocols initiated

please explain its relevant grammer

IMO the answer shd be D as it properly explains two actions of the past.
What is OA???

Regards,
Chetan

[GmatKiss]

The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated, the accident would not have occurred.

a) The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated
b) The courts ruled that had there being safety protocols initiated
c) The courts rule that had there been safety protocols initiated
d) The courts ruled that had there been safety protocols initiated
e) The courts ruled that have there been safety protocols initiated

please explain its relevant grammer

IMO: D, pls let me know if thats correct, will then explain

[mehrasa]

y, OA is D
I also guess this is D bcuz of IF conditional sentences.. but i would like to know its grammer...any opinion?

[GmatKiss]

The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated, the accident would not have occurred.

a) The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated
b) The courts ruled that had there being safety protocols initiated
c) The courts rule that had there been safety protocols initiated
d) The courts ruled that had there been safety protocols initiated
e) The courts ruled that have there been safety protocols initiated

please explain its relevant grammer

IMO: D, pls let me know if thats correct, will then explain

Parallelism

[sumitpune]

Between Have/Had .. Had because we need past verb
A E out
C out because of Rule we need Ruled

B . being !! not required here

D is only choice left and correct one.

D wins

[abcgmat]

The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated, the accident would not have occurred.

a) The courts ruled that have there being safety protocols initiated
b) The courts ruled that had there being safety protocols initiated
c) The courts rule that had there been safety protocols initiated
d) The courts ruled that had there been safety protocols initiated
e) The courts ruled that have there been safety protocols initiated

Had (past) + would have combination.
Since the second part has would have, the first part should have 'had'
So A, E are out, C (rule) is not referring to past so C is out
B- Being

So D is correct