Примеры использования Author was informed на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The author was informed of the decision on 28 June 2012.
As early as 18 July 2003 by a decision of that date the author was informed that she was required to leave the State party without delay.
The author was informed of the rulings on 23 June 2005.
However, the County Prosecutor decided not to initiate a prosecution, for lack of evidence; the author was informed of this decision in July 1989.
In December 1987, the author was informed that the investigation was discontinued.
Following one of those clashes between the PKK andthe security forces in March 1990 in a neighbouring village, the author was informed that his name had been revealed to the authorities.
The author was informed that he was entitled to legal representation for the court hearing.
The officer also relied on research done by the staff of the Documentation Centre.On 19 September 1994, the author was informed that a negative decision had been reached.
After some time, the author was informed that Mr. G would not rehire her on account of what had happened.
The State party argues that there was no violation of the procedural law by officers of the DSSC and submits that the author was informed of this fact on many occasions, including by the General Prosecutor's Office.
The author was informed that he should have complained to the Ministry of Communications and Informatization first.
A list of the documents included in the case file was enclosed with the summons and the author was informed of the possibility of requesting copies of the documents or of examining the case file if he chose.
The author was informed that additional copies would be provided only if he paid for the copying.
The State party submits that the Ombudsman received several letters from the author, that each letter was examined by the Ombudsman, and that on each occasion the author was informed about the Ombudsman's findings.
On 22 October 1998, the author was informed that he was to be returned to Mogadishu, via Johannesburg.
The author has challenged this, butthe Committee notes from the text of the Constitutional Court's decision of 24 September 1996, that the author was informed about the defects of his appeal and given an opportunity to remedy it, which he failed to do.
On 12 July 1993, the author was informed that the Office Fédéral des Réfugiés, on 1 July 1993, had rejected his request for asylum.
Subsequent letters to the Minister for Justice(Garde des Sceaux)and President Mitterrand did not change the situation, as the author was informed by the office of the Garde des Sceaux and the President that they could not interfere with pending judicial procedures.
The author was informed of this decision by registered letter of 21 February 1995 from the Registry of the Court of Appeal of Paris.
By a letter of 3 January 2008, the author was informed by the head of the Interior Department that her allegations had not been verified.
The author was informed of the second visit(from 28 July to 6 August 2000) by fax from the Italian Central Authority on 14 August 2000.
In the same letter the author was informed that he had an appointment with the insurance company's physicians on 20 April 1998.
Indeed, the author was informed on 9 December 1989, in the attachment to the form he signed on that day, of his right to legal assistance.
The State party reiterates that the author was informed, during his first interview after landing in Australia, that he was entitled to seek legal advice and legal aid.
The author was informed by investigators and in court of his rights; these rights were also printed on the procedural forms that were examined and signed by him.
At the same time the author was informed that within the next few days he could request the registrar to set another hearing date.
On 31 March 2008, the author was informed that the pretrial investigation was finished and that he could acquaint himself with all the case materials. On 15 May 2008, he informed the prosecutor that the prohibition to leave Palanga had been imposed on him since 13 September 2005 and therefore he could not go to Vilnius to familiarize himself with the materials.
By the same letter, the author was informed that she could appeal this decision either to the Ministry of Justice or within a month to a court.
On 18 May 2005, the author was informed that the decision on revocation of his suspended sentence of nine months' imprisonment depended on the outcome of proceedings against him for suspected libel. On 16 May 2007, the Berlin Tiergarten District Court, revoked the suspended sentence in light of the author's other convictions during the probation period, on libel charges for insults on 9 March and 30 September 2004, as well as for other libel for which proceedings had not yet been concluded.
On 7 September 2011, the author was informed by the Immigration Service that her visa would not be extended and that she had to leave Denmark within a month.