Примеры использования Communication separately на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Pursuant to rule 66, the Committee may examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 22 January 2004, the State party requested the Committee to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits, in accordance with rule 97, paragraph 3, of the Committee's rules of procedure. On 11 February 2004, the Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures decided, on behalf of the Committee, to examine the admissibility of the communication together with the merits.
The Committee may decide to consider the question of admissibility of a communication and the merits of a communication separately.
To accede to the requests of the States parties concerned to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits(split request) in relation to communications Nos. 51/2013, 59/2013, 62/2013 and 64/2013;
If a child is engaged in more than one ongoing communication, the parent may need to opt-out of each communication separately.
On 16 August 2006, the State party requested the Committee to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits, in accordance with rule 97, paragraph 3, of the Committee's rules of procedure. On 1 February 2007, the Special Rapporteur on New Communications and Interim Measures decided, on behalf of the Committee, to examine the admissibility of the communication together with the merits.
Pursuant to rule 66, the Committee may decide to consider the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits.
On 4 August 2008, the State party requested the Committee to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits, in accordance with Rule 97, paragraph 3, of the Committee's rules of procedure. On 4 September 2008, the Special Rapporteur for New Communications and Interim Measures decided, on behalf of the Committee, to examine the admissibility of the communication together with its merits.
Pursuant to rule 66 of its rules of procedure, the Committee may examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
In accordance with rule 66 of its rules of procedure, the Committee may decide to consider the question of admissibility and the merits of a communication separately.
Pursuant to rule 66 of its rules of procedure, the Committee may examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
In accordance with rule 66, the Committee may decide to consider the question of admissibility of a communication and the merits of a communication separately.
In accordance with rule 66 of its rule of procedure, the Committee may decide to consider the question of admissibility and merits of a communication separately.
Referring to rule 66 of the Committee's rules of procedure,the State party requests the Committee to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits.
Pursuant to rule 66 of its rules of procedure, the Committee may decide to consider the question of admissibility and the merits of a communication separately.
At its fifty-fourth session, the Committee decided to accede to theState party's request and to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits.
On 20 June 2014, the Committee, acting through the Working Group, decided,pursuant to rule 66 of its rules of procedure, to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits.
On 27 April 2007, the Human Rights Committee, through its Special Rapporteur on New Communications, decided to examine the question of admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 19 May 2009, the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteuron new communications and interim measures, decided to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 12 March 2009, the Committee, through the Special Rapporteuron new communications and interim measures, decided not to consider the admissibility and the merits of the communication separately.
On 12 March 2009, the Committee, through its Special Rapporteur on new communications andinterim measures, decided not to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 22 February 2011, the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteur on New Communications and Interim Measures,decided to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 1 September 2004 the Committee, through the person of its SpecialRapporteur on new communications, decided to consider the admissibility of the communication separately from the substance.
On 12 March 2009, the Committee, through its Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures,decided not to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 17 April 2008,the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteur on New Communications and Interim Measures, decided to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 21 May 2012, the Working Group on Communications, acting on behalf of the Committee pursuant to rule 66 of the Committee's rules of procedure,decided to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits.
On 7 July 2009, the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteuron new communications and interim measures, decided to examine the issue of the admissibility of the communication separately from that of the merits.
On 20 October 2004,the Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures denied the State party's request for the Committee to examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.
On 18 October 2010, at the State party's request, the Committee,acting through its Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures, decided to consider the admissibility of the communication separately from its merits.
On 5 August 2009,the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteur on new communications and interim measures, rejected the State party's request that it examine the admissibility of the communication separately from the merits.