Примеры использования Author has failed на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
It is submitted that the author has failed to resort to the following remedies.
The author has failed to fully substantiate the rights violations of which he claims to be a victim.
In the light of the above, the Committee considers that the author has failed to meet the requirements of article 14, paragraph 7(a), of the Convention.
The author has failed to demonstrate in any manner how New Zealand law falls short of this general institutional obligation.
In the circumstances,the Committee concludes that the author has failed to advance a claim within the meaning of article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
Люди также переводят
The author has failed to pursue this potential domestic remedy, and so this portion of his claim is also inadmissible.
In the circumstances, the Committee considers that the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate, for purposes of admissibility, this particular claim.
The author has failed to demonstrate how the LAC's decision to refuse him legal aid on the basis that his claim lacked merit was unfair or amounted to unequal treatment.
As to the claim under article 26 of the Covenant, the Committee finds that the author has failed to present any arguments substantiating this claim.
Accordingly, the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate his claim for purposes of admissibility.
In the absence of other information in this respect,the Committee considers that the author has failed to substantiate sufficiently this claim, for purposes of admissibility.
It follows that the author has failed sufficiently to substantiate this allegation, for purposes of admissibility.
However, the author's claims in this regard are general, andthe Committee considers that the author has failed to provide sufficiently detailed information in order to substantiate them.
Accordingly, the author has failed to establish that the State party was responsible for causing a violation of article 7.
The Secretariat may seek clarifi cations on numerous issues if the author has failed to give crucial information, such as that outlined at Section 2.1.2a.
Alternatively, the author has failed to substantiate her allegations under this provision, given the broad range of effective remedies available in the State party.
In the absence of other pertinent information in this connexion,the Committee considers that the author has failed sufficiently to substantiate this allegation, for purposes of admissibility.
It stresses that the author has failed to inform the Committee about her application, her frequent correspondence notwithstanding.
In the absence of any other pertinent information in that respect, the Committee considers, however, that the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate that claim for purposes of admissibility.
It also notes that the author has failed to provide details about the contents of this communication.
In respect of the author's claims under articles 6 and 7, the Committee finds that they have not been substantiated, for purposes of admissibility; in this respect,accordingly, the author has failed to advance a claim under the Covenant, within the meaning of article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
In the present case the author has failed to prove the existence of all the elements necessary for a re-trial.
The Committee considers that in the present case, the author has failed to demonstrate that he has exhausted all available domestic remedies.
The State party concludes that the author has failed sufficiently to substantiate his claim under article 25(b), which should therefore be held inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
The State party argues that the author has failed to substantiate his claim under article 14, subparagraph 3 f.
The Committee thus finds that the author has failed to substantiate sufficiently, for purposes of admissibility, any claim of a potential violation of article 26, on the ground of race.
The State party concludes that the author has failed to advance a claim under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
The Committee considers that the author has failed to substantiate, for purposes of admissibility, that he is a victim of a violation of article 10, paragraph 3.
In the present case, the Committee is of the view that the author has failed to demonstrate that the conduct of the criminal proceedings suffered from such defects.
It considers, however, that the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate his allegations, for purposes of admissibility.