Примеры использования Commission felt на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
A few recommendations on which the Commission felt that no action was required.
The Commission felt that that project was very useful in fostering uniformity of laws.
Despite the paucity of relevant practice, the Commission felt that there was no reason to depart from those general rules.
The Commission felt that the Agreement would have a considerable impact on many aspects of its activities.
In view of its work programme and deadlines,however, the Commission felt that such a postponement was not feasible.
Люди также переводят
The Commission felt that the most promising method was through the use of agrometeorological models and GIS technology.
The discussion yielded a number of issues that the Commission felt the secretariat should address in its future work.
The Commission felt that it was important to explore ways and means of strengthening the revenue base of NEFs from external resources.
There was some discussion over the word"favour", which the Commission felt would be better expressed by the word"advantage.
The Commission felt that it requires further details of the operations undertaken and results for this part of the annual report.
It was noted that four documents were mentioned in the annual report and the Commission felt that the Authority should be provided with a copy of each.
For this reason the Commission felt it important to recall that its methodology was based on current realities, not future possibilities.
He was not convinced that the problem should be addressed in the Guide to Practice,although he would have no objection if the Commission felt that a draft guideline along those lines should be included in the Guide.
This decision was taken since the Commission felt that hazard pay was not an intrinsic part of the compensation package.
The Commission felt that certain of the programme activities proposed for deletion were of sufficient importance that they should be retained.
That the problem may arise in the future thus cannot be ruled out, and the Commission felt that it would be wise to anticipate that possibility in the Guide to Practice.
The Commission felt that not enough consideration had been given by the organizations to its previous recommendations presented in the 2006 report A/61/30.
That proposal was not accepted, as the Commission felt that the matter was already adequately dealt with in paragraph 1.
The Commission felt that it was a comprehensive report but would benefit if activities carried out in the current reporting year were separated from those carried out in previous years.
Mr. Schöfisch(Germany) said that if the Commission felt that the best way of providing guidance to legislators was to produce a single consolidated document in due course, his delegation would not oppose that decision.
If the Commission felt that useful output could not be anticipated from its work on the topic in the near future, Japan would not insist on its continuation.
In examining the report of the Panel, the Commission felt that it needed to express some concern at some of the recommendations since in its view they would in fact serve to weaken the Commission and the future of the international civil service.
The Commission felt that its work requirements made it essential to hold a 12-week split session the following year at the United Nations Office in Geneva.
Given its particular nature, however, the Commission felt that the Guide would better serve its practical purpose if the guidelines devoted more specifically to unilateral statements formulated in respect of bilateral treaties were to be grouped in a single separate section.
The Commission felt that what was useful about the data was that they provided a good baseline against which future analyses could be compared and trends established.
The Commission felt that such employment should be considered as a priority area and efforts should be made by the organizations to develop appropriate policies.
The Commission felt that the basic strength of the current system was that it took into account the fact that additional expenditures were incurred by staff members with dependants.
The Commission felt that the strengthening of this obligation was particularly important in the light of the value placed by groundwater experts on the joint management of transboundary aquifers.
The Commission felt that, as a first priority, there was a need for immediate measures to cover the remaining gap of $31 million to enable the Agency to maintain the essential services for the refugees.
The Commission felt that it was a comprehensive report but would benefit if activities carried out in the current reporting year were separated from those carried out in previous years.