Примеры использования Author was dismissed на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
On 3 February 2003 the author was dismissed.
After an internal inquiry, the author was dismissed from service on 2 March 1987, without any opportunity to call witnesses in his favour.
Eventually, on 9 February 1996, the author was dismissed.
The author was dismissed because it was discovered that her stance stemmed from her political and ideological opinions.
COLPUERTOS was liquidated under Act No. 01/1991 and, as a result, the author was dismissed on 1 January 1994.
The fact that the author was dismissed as an officer of the Security Police, pursuant to article 131 of the State Protection Office Act, did not constitute a sanction against him.
Turkey857 the State party argued that the crucial datewas 9 June 2000, when the author was dismissed from her position as a teacher.
The author was dismissed on 9 June 2000 and her communication is therefore inadmissible in accordance with article 4, paragraph 2(e) of the Optional Protocol.
The State party refers to the applicable legislation and notes that the author was dismissed ex lege from his post together with others holding similar posts.
On 29 April 1986, the author was dismissed from a graduate training course in Communicative Disorders at the University of Western Ontario, after having spent two years in this programme.
On the same day, Mr. Madafferi was returned to immigration detention at Maribyrnong.A constitutional writ issued by the author was dismissed by the High Court on 25 June 2003.
Before fleeing Croatia, on 12 August 1991, the author was dismissed from his job as a liquidator-cashier at Zagreb Bank, because of his allegedly unjustified absence from work for a week.
In considering this provision, the Committee notes the State party's argument that the crucial datewas 9 June 2000, when the author was dismissed from her position as a teacher.
On 21 August 1995, the author was dismissed from his job at the Ministry of Internal Affairs under section 58, paragraph l, of the Regulations on the Service in the Internal Affairs Offices of 23 December 1992 the Regulations.
With regard to the author's claims under articles 14, paragraph 1, and 16 of the Covenant,the Committee notes that it would appear that the author was dismissed from his position in the public service for disciplinary reasons.
The State argues that the author was dismissed from his post ex lege, since there was no doubt that the author's post was a component part of the Security Police paras. 10.1 and 10.2.
The issues arising from this review which have been sufficiently substantiated, for purposes of admissibility, relate to the failure of the JSC to provide the author with copies of the proceedings from the hearing on 18 November 1998, and the findings andreasoning behind the decision of the Committee of Inquiry on the basis of which the author was dismissed.
The State party submits that the author was dismissed on the grounds that she failed to have regular work attendance and did not act in line with business ethics, while Mr. D.U. had no work attendance issues and no complaint by any customer had been recorded against him.
In respect to the claim made by the author that her work contract had been terminated due to gender-based discrimination and that she, therefore, should be compensated pursuant to article 5 of the Labour Act,the Kocaeli 3rd Labour Court concluded that it was not possible to assert that the author was dismissed just on account of the fact that she was"female.
It also considered that although the NSWFB had stated,in a letter to the President of the ADB, that the author was dismissed because he refused to do certain work, the NSWFB had“subjected” the author“to a detriment, namely to termination of his employment without notice” because of his disciplinary allegations: this, in the tribunal's opinion, was contrary to Section 50 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.
The Committee also notes that the court found that there was no violation of the principle of equal treatment under article 5 of the Labour Act,that it could not be said that the author was dismissed because she was"female" and that the fact that Mr. D.U. with whom the author was alleged to have a relationship,was still in employment, was not enough to prove gender-based discrimination.
As to the complaint that(i) the dismissals from Australian Airlines violated article 26, as did(ii)the State's failure to protect them against that, the State party argues that the claim is inadmissible ratione temporis in relation to Messrs. Bone, Craig and Ivanoff. These three authors were dismissed prior to the entry into force of the Optional Protocol.
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 order of suspension was rendered moot, of course, once the author was formally dismissed as a civil servant, and this dismissal was affirmed by the High Administrative Court on 31 January 2001.
The author claims that he was dismissed without justification.
The author was neither dismissed nor did he apply for any specific vacant post of a higher rank.
As a result of the accident, the author was immediately dismissed by the company and was told by the manager not to make any complaints.
In a letter of 24 November 1995, counsel for the author states that he has been informed that the author's appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 3 November 1995.
It is hardly conceivable, thus, that there was no doubt that the author belonged to the Security Police,what leads us to conclude that the author was not dismissed from his post ex lege.
The author's cassation appeal was dismissed by the Cassation Court.