Примеры использования These circumstances the committee на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
In these circumstances, the Committee considered that the complainants had exhausted domestic remedies.
In these circumstances, the Committee concludes that there has been a violation of article 15 of the Convention.
In these circumstances, the Committee concludes that the authors did not exhaust domestic remedies.
In these circumstances, the Committee finds that the author's right under article 9, paragraph 3, was violated.
Under these circumstances, the Committee considers that domestic remedies have been unreasonably prolonged.
In these circumstances, the Committee considers it unnecessary to examine separately the author's claim under article 6.
In these circumstances the Committee concludes that there has been a violation of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Covenant.
In these circumstances the Committee considers that the allegation has not been substantiated, for purposes of admissibility.
In these circumstances the Committee ought to impose time restrictions on stages of compliance on a case-by-case basis.
In these circumstances, the Committee concludes that the facts before it do not disclose a violation of article 14, paragraph 1.
In these circumstances, the Committee considers that the author has not sufficiently substantiated his claims under article 6 of the Covenant.
In these circumstances the Committee finds that the conditions laid down in article 22, paragraph 5(b), of the Convention have not been met.
In these circumstances, the Committee considers that due weight must be given to the authors' allegations of torture and ill-treatment.
In these circumstances, the Committee finds that the author has not substantiated a claim within the meaning of article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
Under these circumstances, the Committee concludes that the facts before it do not disclose a violation of article 14, paragraph 2, of the Covenant.
Under these circumstances, the Committee considers that it is not necessary to examine issues relating to the supervisory review process.
In these circumstances the Committee considers that the author's case must be distinguished from the case of Casanovas v. France Communication 441/1990.
In these circumstances, the Committee concludes that the author's rights under article 25(b) of the Covenant, read in conjunction with article 2, have been violated.
Under these circumstances, the Committee cannot conclude that the restrictions imposed on the authors' expression were incompatible with article 19, paragraph 3.
In these circumstances, the Committee finds that article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol does not preclude it from considering of the communication.
Under these circumstances, the Committee requested the Government to provide more detailed information on the application of particular provisions of the Convention.
In these circumstances, the Committee concluded that it was not precluded by the requirements of article 22, paragraph 5(b), of the Convention, from considering the communication.
In these circumstances the Committee finds that the author has not substantiated his claims that he is at risk of being tortured if he returns to his country of origin.
In these circumstances the Committee considers that, for the purpose of admissibility, the claim is unfounded, under rule 107(b) of the Committee's rules of procedure.
In these circumstances, the Committee is of the view that the investigation conducted by the authorities of the State party did not satisfy the requirements of article 12 of the Convention.
In these circumstances the Committee concludes that the author's allegations must be given due weight and that the author's rights under article 14, paragraph 3(b, d and e), were violated.
Under these circumstances the Committee does not need to address the permissibility and applicability of the other dispositions contained in the State party's reservation to the Optional Protocol.
Under these circumstances, the Committee considered that the new communication constituted an abuse of the right to submit a communication and declared it inadmissible under article 3 of the Optional Protocol.
In these circumstances the Committee considers that the author has failed to substantiate, for purposes of admissibility,the allegation that his right to take part in the conduct of public affairs was violated.
Under these circumstances the Committee cannot conclude that the prohibition of the possession and use of drugs, without any exemption for specific religious groups, is not proportionate and necessary to achieve this purpose.