Примеры использования Decision was confirmed на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
This decision was confirmed by the Prague City Court.
On 1 February 2000,legal aid was declined, and this decision was confirmed upon review on 3 March 2000.
This decision was confirmed by the Director of Public Prosecutions.
On 27 March 2003, the Soviet District Court of Kazan rejected Mr. Yemelianov's complaint to have the case re-opened on the basis of new evidence; this decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Tatarstan on 28 April 2003. On 25 September 2003, the Supreme Court of Tatarstan rejected Mr. Yemelianov's request for a supervisory review in this regard.
This decision was confirmed by the courts of appeal and cassation.
It also found that the third requirement for restitution, concerning the unlawfulness ofthe current owners acquisition, was not met in the case. This decision was confirmed by the Plzen Regional Court on 25 March 1996. The author's appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed on 20 August 1997 on the ground that he did not fulfil the precondition of citizenship in 1991.
This decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Tatarstan on 16 May 2000.
On 22 February 1999, the District Court of Olomouc rejected the author's claim for compensation for 60,000 Czech crowns under Law No. 87/1991 on extrajudicial rehabilitation, on the ground that she should have submitted her claim before the deadline set by the law and as she was not a Czech citizen within the statutory restitution period.On 24 May 2000, this decision was confirmed by the Regional Court in Ostrava.
This decision was confirmed by the Executive Committee of the KCF in September of this year.
The Court further considered that although the acts resulted in serious insecurity and anxiety,there was no wrongful violation of their rights such as to give rise to a basis for compensation for non-pecuniary damages under the Liability for Damages Act. Considered on appeal by the High Court of Eastern Denmark, the decision was confirmed on 3 October 2008. On 16 December 2008, the Appeals Permission Board denied the petitioners permission to appeal the decision for a third-instance review.
The decision was confirmed by the Correctional Services Commissioner on review.
On an unspecified date, this decision was confirmed by the General Prosecutor's Office.
This decision was confirmed on appeal(see para. 42 below). On 5 December 2003, Judge Bossa joined the Bench after she had certified that she had familiarized herself with the records of the trial proceedings.
On the same day, this decision was confirmed by the Prosecutor's Office of the Kashkadarya Region.
This decision was confirmed by the cantonal administrative tribunal in June 1999.
This decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, on 26 October 2004.
This decision was confirmed on appeal, on 25 September 1997, by the Minsk City Court.
This decision was confirmed by the results of a national referendum held on 21 September 1991.
This decision was confirmed on appeal by the Minsk City Court on 25 September 1997.
This decision was confirmed by the Constitutional and Social Chamber of the High Court of Cusco on 13 July 2012.
This decision was confirmed during a meeting of the Council of Environment Ministers of the CIS in December 1993.
That decision was confirmed on appeal by the Federal Court of Appeal on 4 October 2002 see paragraph 2.11 above.
The decision was confirmed by the Trade and Development Board at its twenty-fourth executive session on 12 May 2000.
This approach and decision was confirmed by Mr. Gonzales Finat in his letter of 2 July 2002 addressed to Mr. Capel Ferrer.
This decision was confirmed by the Inland Transport Committee at its seventy-first session in February 2009 ECE/TRANS/206 para. 67.
This decision was confirmed by a ruling of the Administrative Tribunal dated 23 November 2005 and by a judgement of the Administrative Court dated 23 February 2006.
This political decision was confirmed, on 30 March 2012, by the formal adoption of the Decision on the Outcomes of the Negotiations under Article XXIV.
That decision was confirmed by the Committee on 19 October 1992(1178th meeting). Subsequently, such reports were received from the three Governments see annex VII.
In all other respects the decisions were confirmed.
At the summit in Brussels, European leaders decided to open accession talks with Serbia in January at the latest, after the decision is confirmed in December.