Примеры использования Author contests на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The author contests the State party's arguments on the merits.
In his letter of 8 November 2002, the author contests the State party's arguments.
The author contests that a thorough investigation was made in this case.
In his letter of 26 September 2002, the author contests the State party's arguments.
The author contests the expert's conclusion and claims that he was partial.
In his comments of 4 August 2003, the author contests the arguments of the State party.
Whilst the author contests this, the Committee is not in a position to resolve this factual question.
In August 1991, the author's son was dismissed from his job at the"Zagrebačka banka" for alleged uncertified absence, which the author contests.
The author contests the State party's explanation on the system of assigning legal aid counsel from a roster.
With regard to the case brought by Mr. Mboma, the author contests the State party's allegation that Mr. Mboma had given him money.
The author contests the State party's submission that her son never received employment offers.
With respect to the past incidents of misconduct cited by the State party, the author contests the allegation that the Supreme Court found him to have violated the fundamental rights of the person in question.
The author contests the State party's submission pertaining to the conduct of her son see paras. 3.22- 3.24 above.
The author basically alleges that Ms. Gascon said in her written statement that the motive for the crime was that she wanted to put an end to their relationship, but the author contests this and claims rather that she wanted to obtain ownership of their joint residence.
The Committee also notes that the author contests this view that he did not have a prima facie right to a pension.
The author contests the State party's assertion that domestic law was violated in the registration process.
In his comments of 15 October 1998, the author contests that the leaflets"include a misrepresentation of the historical formation of the State of Belarus.
The author contests the State party's claim that he did not appeal against the decision of 5 May 2004 refusing him parole.
With regard to the nondisclosure of the document, the author contests the State party's arguments and points out that Ms. Gascon's written statement was essential for his full answer and defence.
The author contests this argument, stating that an appeal to the Prosecutor's office under the supervisory review procedure is optional.
As to the admissibility of the communication, the author contests the State party's contentions on exhaustion of local remedies, incompatibility with the Covenant and insufficient substantiation.
The author contests the State party's submission that her son had all the tools at his disposal provided for in books III and IX of the Social Code see para. 3.26.
The author contests the State party's submission that her son can claim a personal budget and that he had failed to submit an application form for the grant of a personal budget.
The author contests the State party's claim that he was granted prison privileges despite the fact that he had not yet served a quarter of his sentence or discharged his civil liabilities.
The author contests the State party's contention that the Supreme Court merely delivered a judgement on the asylum proceedings and reiterates his view that this was a hearing in which both participants took part.
On 20 July 2013, the author contests that State party's submission that her son withdrew the lawsuit he had filed before the Regional Social Court because it was inadmissible, and reiterates that it was withdrawn because the Court had threatened to impose an even greater fine in case of non-withdrawal.
The author contests the redefinition of the offences to apply, in his case, the aggravating circumstances of membership of an"organized gang"- a charge unknown in criminal law at the time of the offences- and to enable him to be sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment, thereby violating article 15, paragraph 1, of the Covenant.
The authors contest the State party's argument that their detention is lawful.
On 29 July 2005 the author contested the State party's observations.
The author contested this argument, stating that such an appeal was optional.