Примеры использования Further claim на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Any further claim against Longines Watch Co.
Indeed, he only agreed to do this when Clementina signed a"quittance" renouncing,on behalf of herself and her descendants, any further claim on the estate.
He adds, however, a further claim under article 7 of the Covenant.
The further claim that this action caused UNRWA to suffer a financial loss also was not substantiated.
In addition to the claims raised in their initial submission,the authors further claim violations of articles 2, paragraph 2, 9, paragraph 1, 10, paragraph 1, and 14, paragraph 1, of the Covenant.
They further claim that this same fact constitutes a violation of the right to family life under article 17 of the Covenant.
The Committee observes that the petitioners further claim that their right to obtain protection and an effective remedy in the present case was breached by the State party.
They further claim that they originate from a dangerous region where terrorists, military and other armed groups are waging war.
The main complainant and his wife further claim that they are unfit to travel due to the main complainant's deteriorated psychological state of health and his wife's general state of health.
GIC made a further claim in the amount of USD 34,944,207 for the diminution in value of certain externally managed securities as of 31 December 1990.
The authors further claim that the judge was not impartial, but biased in favour of the prosecution.
The authors further claim a violation of article 23, paragraph 1, in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 1.
The authors further claim that the alleged victims' rights under article 14, paragraph 3(b) and(d), were violated.
The authors further claim that the trial court was biased and violated the principle of independence and impartiality, in violation of article 14, paragraph 1, of the Covenant.
The authors further claim that they were denied equality before the law, because they were denied legal aid to argue the seven grounds of appeal.
The authors further claim that article 14, paragraph 3(c), has been violated in their case, since they were convicted some eight years after the incident.
However, any such further claim has to be made within 30 days of learning of the HPD's order but not later than one year from the date of the order.
The authors further claim a violation of article 17 of the Covenant, since they and their cattle have been expelled from the lands which they held in collective property.
The authors further claim a violation of Mr. Kovalev's right to life under article 6 of the Covenant, since he was sentenced to death after an unfair trial.
The authors further claim that, although the lawyer was assigned and paid by the State party, he demanded 500,000 pesetas from their father for alleged expenses prior to the hearing.
The authors further claim that they were not put on an identification parade, although they had asked for one, and that the judge should therefore have disallowed the dock identification made by Walsh.
They further claim that the ill-treatment they were subjected to in pretrial detention, as well as their present conditions of detention, amount to violations of articles 7 and 10 of the Covenant.
The authors further claim that they did not have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of their defence and that they did not have the opportunity to examine or have examined the witnesses against them.
The authors further claim that the German reservation regarding article 26 of the Covenant is invalid as it is particularly extensive and limits the scope of the Committee to a disproportionate extent.
They further claim that because the transmission of a family name is a personal right belonging to the husband and the wife, this personal right also belongs to the children, who receive a family name from their parents.
The authors further claim that they were not informed that counsel had been assigned to them, that they never saw or spoke to him and that counsel abandoned the appeal without their consent.
The authors further claim a violation of article 14 of the Covenant, since they were forced to use English throughout the court proceedings, a language they do not normally use and in which they are not fluent.
They further claim that the Swedish authorities only focused on minor inconsistencies instead of duly considering their claim of persecution due to their mixed origin.
The authors further claim that article 110 of the Kyrgyz CPC violates article 9, paragraph 3, of the Covenant in that it does not require that anyone detained on a criminal charge is brought promptly before a judge.
The authors further claim that Mr. Kovalev's right to have his sentence and conviction reviewed by a higher tribunal was violated in view of the fact that the sentence rendered by the Supreme Court is not subject to appeal.