Примеры использования Limitation must на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Any limitation must be proportionate and strictly necessary.
Access to evidence used is, however, a prerequisite for appeal against inclusion and as such, its limitation must be narrowly construed.
The range of such limitation must be determined in the verdict.
At the same time, discrimination against individuals should be eliminated.59 Article 46(2)of the Declaration states that any limitation must be“in accordance with international human rights obligations”.
Then the limitation must be entrusted only to the internal diodes.
Even if a valid public purpose canbe established for the limitation of property or other rights related to indigenous territories, the limitation must be necessary and proportional to that purpose.
In other words any limitation must be an exception to the rule of freedom and must not become the rule itself.
Article 22, which protects freedom of association,appears to place a stronger obligation on States than article 21 on freedom of assembly in that article 22 requires that the limitation must be prescribed by law, whereas article 21 simply states that the limitation must be in accordance with the law.
Under the Covenant, any limitation must not only pursue a legitimate interest but also be"necessary in a democratic society.
In order for a limitation to be valid, first, the right involved must be one subject to limitation by the State and, second,as indicated by the Declaration, the limitation must be necessary and proportional in relation to a valid State objective motivated by concern for the human rights of others.
Such a limitation must be strictly proportionate to the only legitimate aim: to avoid jeopardizing an ongoing criminal investigation.
States may have a legitimate interest in limiting certain manifestations of religion; but that limitation must have a legitimate aim, be proportionate to that aim, and be subject to the possibility of challenge and remedy.
The limitation must be necessary for reaching a legitimate aim, as well as in proportion to the aim and the least intrusive option available.
That means that a true andcompelling need to impose the limitation must be clearly established and the objective could not be accomplished by any other less restrictive measure.
Any limitation must be based on the grounds of public safety, order, health, morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, it must respond to a pressing public or social need, it must pursue a legitimate aim and it must be proportionate to that aim.
Where a counter-terrorism measure seeks to impose a limitation on a right or freedom, this limitation must be necessary in the pursuit of a legitimate counter-terrorism objective and the impact of the counter-terrorism measure on rights or freedoms must be strictly proportional to the nature of that objective.
Each limitation must be based on a formal legislative foundation that must be as clear as the infringement is serious.
Any limitation must be reviewed with sufficient frequency to ensure that the criteria for imposing limitations still exist.
Any such limitation must therefore be sought in a treaty and may vary from an absolute prohibition to a discretion accorded to the State either to extradite the individual sought, or to punish him or her itself.
With regard to the requirement that the limitation must be imposed for one of the purposes set out in articles 18, paragraph 3, and 19, paragraph 3, respective, the State party submits that the Order was imposed both for the protection of the fundamental rights of others and for the protection of public morals.
Article 46(2) of the Declaration states that any limitation must be"in accordance with international human rights obligations","non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society.
Our difficulties and limitations must be mutual and inherent.
Limitations must be confined to a minimum, and the burden of argumentation was always on Governments that imposed them.
Permissible limitations must also comply with general principles of human rights law, and must thus be non-discriminatory, reasonable and proportionate.
In this regard, limitations must be proportionate to the interest to be protected and must be the least intrusive means to achieve the desired objective.
Such limitations must be"prescribed by law" and"necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
Such limitations must be demonstrated to be necessary and proportionate, and subject to judicial safeguards.
Such limitations must be prescribed by law and be necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
In addition, the limitations must be necessary in a democratic society for attaining one of these defined purposes.
In practice, this means that the limitations must meet the test of necessity and the requirement of proportionality.