Примеры использования It failed to provide на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
For example, it failed to provide purchase invoices and customs documentation.
Ms. Schöpp-Schilling said that while the report clearly recognized the importance of article 11, it failed to provide any statistics.
However, it failed to provide any evidence of its ownership of the furnishings.
In relation to MSM's claim for stamp duty charges, it failed to provide proof of payment in relation to charges.
Finally, it failed to provide sufficient evidence of the circumstances of the scrapping of the goods.
Draft paragraph 1 precluded such retroactive application. However, it failed to provide commercial parties with the predictability that they needed.
However, it failed to provide evidence demonstrating the actual transfer of salaries into the bank accounts of the employees.
The General Assembly would send a very regrettable message if it failed to provide the Tribunals with the necessary resources to complete their important work.
However, it failed to provide customs certificates to the Panel because"no customs certificates[were] on hand therefore no submission[was] possible.
The Committee calls upon Peru to submit as soon as possible all the relevant information which it failed to provide during the consideration of the present report.
In particular, it failed to provide sufficient and appropriate evidence that the contract would have been profitable as a whole.
The claimant provided a schedule listing a variety of expenditures relating to the Dubai office, but it failed to provide sufficient evidence of payment of these items.
It failed to provide evidence to support the proposition that it would have made a profit at all or, indeed, that it ever made a profit in its work.
Although GRECSA stated that it abandoned the Project on 2 August 1990, it failed to provide details of any work that was performed on or after 2 May 1990.
It failed to provide evidence to establish that it did in fact make the payments to its employees for the airfares, or to airlines on behalf of its employees, for any part of the claim.
However, it failed to provide more specific evidence such as invoices and receipts, or evidence which established that the alleged losses arose as a direct result of Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait.
Included in the claim is a claim for hired Egyptian labour, rentals and other costs incurred in Iraq,however, it failed to provide details of the amounts claimed or evidence in support of these items.
Further, it failed to provide any evidence of the presence of the tangible property in Iraq, such as inventories and customs documentation. Antia stated that it had left the police report in Iraq and had requested that the police report be sent to it. .
Although China National provided a schedule of the 38 sites where the cash was allegedly left, andthe exact amounts left at each site, it failed to provide any evidence that it left cash as alleged.
Although GRECSA stated that it abandoned the Project on 2 August 1990, it failed to provide details of the date of issue of the final acceptance certificate or of any work that was performed on or after 2 May 1990.
It failed to provide a list of the employees to whom it alleged it paid such“ex gratia” payments, payroll records for the employees for the period relevant to its claim, or proof that the claimed amount was paid by Aurora Engineering. The Panel recommends no compensation for payment or relief to others.E.
The Panel finds that, although Eteco provided evidence of ownership of some of the items of tangible property, it failed to provide sufficient evidence of the presence of the tangible property in Iraq.
For example, it failed to provide monthly/periodic reports, planned/actual time schedules, interim certificates or account invoices, details of work that was completed, but not invoiced, details of payments made by the employer and evidence of retention amounts that were recovered.
However, it failed to provide a number of documents forming an integral part of the Contract, such as KISR's general conditions of tenders and contracts and Dutch Agro's tender for the Project. Dutch Agro did not provide financial statements, balance sheets, copies of the original calculations of profit as incorporated within the make-up of the Project, management reports on actual financial performance or copies of the new agreements entered into with the KISR. Dutch Agro stated that such documents were unavailable.
The Panel finds that Eastern's claim for loss of profits is unsupported because it failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the contracts on which it was working would have been profitable.
With respect to the loss of goods in transit,KNPC provided supporting documentation for items with values of over KWD 10,000, but it failed to provide supporting documentation for some of the items with values under KWD 10,000.
Lithuania, for its part,contested the findings of the preliminary report and argued that it failed to provide information as set out in appendix II, e.g., as regards: reasonable alternatives(for example locational and technological), the no-action alternative and the potential environmental impact of the proposed activity.
With regard to the suspects mentioned in the incident,the Sudanese authorities concerned observed that the Ethiopian Government was not cooperative as it failed to provide any information or evidence pertaining to the dates and means of entry of suspects into the Sudan.