Exemplos de uso de Case is admissible em Inglês e suas traduções para o Português
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Official/political
The Commission's analysis of this case begins with its determination that the case is admissible.
Without prejudging the merits, the Commission concludes in this report that the case is admissible since it meets the procedural requirements set forth in the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
They maintain that the case is admissible before the Inter-American Commission, in particular, because the domestic remedies corresponding to their claims were invoked and exhausted with the final sentence confirming the absolution of Santillán.
Without prejudging the merits,the IACHR concludes in this report that the case is admissible, since it meets the requirements set forth in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
Based on the analysis of the parties' positions,the Commission concluded that it is competent to take cognizance of the claim submitted by the petitioners, and that the case is admissible under Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
Without prejudging on the merits,the IACHR concludes herein that the case is admissible, as it meets the requirements set forth in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The Inter-American Commission concludes that it is competent to take up the complaint filed by the petitioners concerning the alleged violation of articles 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1)thereof, and that the case is admissible under articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
Without prejudging the merits of the matter,in this report the IACHR concludes that the case is admissible, as it meets the requirements set out in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The Commission concludes that the case is admissible, and that it is competent to examine the petitioners' claim of alleged violations of Articles 4, 5, 7, 8, and 25, in conjunction with Article 1(1) of the Convention, in keeping with the requirements established in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
Without prejudging the merits of the case, in this report the Commission concludes that the case is admissible, as it meets the requirements stipulated in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The Commission concludes that the case is admissible and that it is competent to hear the petition lodged by the petitioners concerning the alleged violation of Articles 4, 5, 7, 8, 17 and 25, in accordance with Article 1(1) of the Convention and in conformity with the requirements set out in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
Without prejudging the merits of the matter,the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights concludes in this report that the case is admissible, inasmuch as it meets the requirements provided in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The Commission concludes that the case is admissible and that it is competent to examine the claim submitted by the petitioners on the alleged violation of Articles 4, 5, 8, and 25, in relation to Article 1(1), of the Convention, in keeping with the requirements established in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
After analyzing the parties' positions,the Commission concludes that it is competent to decide the claim presented by petitioners, and that the case is admissible, in light of Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The plea in the present case is admissible because, according to La Poste, its pleas are directed towards the same objective as those of the Commission, the new plea by UFEX and Others was raised well after the intervention and, having been accused of infringing the rules on State aid, La Poste had an interest in raising pleas omitted by the Commission.
The Commission considers that it is competent to reviewthe complaint presented by the petitioners and declares that the present case is admissible in accordance with the requirements provided in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
As set forth below, pursuant to its examination, the Commission concluded that it is competent to take cognizance of the petitioners' complaints concerning the violations alleged with respect to the investigation of the death of Carlos Saúl Menem(son) andrelated claims, and that the case is admissible pursuant to the terms of Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
After studying the petition and in accordance with Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention,the Commission concluded that the case is admissible with regard to the alleged violation of Articles 4, 5, 8, 25, 2 and 1(1) of the American Convention.
As set forth below, pursuant to its examination, the Commission concluded that it is competent to take cognizance of the petitioners' complaints concerning alleged violations of Articles 4, 8, 25 and 1(1) with respect to the killing of Jorge Omar Gutiérrez andthe response of the State thereto, and that the case is admissible pursuant to the terms of Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
After examining the parties' positions,the Commission concludes that it has competence to take cognizance of the case lodged by the petitioners and that the case is admissible under Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention and the pertinent provisions of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
As set forth below, pursuant to its examination, the Commission concluded that it is competent to take cognizance of the petitioners' complaints concerning alleged violations of Articles 1, 5, 7, 8, 10, 24 and 25 of the American Convention, and to the extent necessary Articles I, XXV andXXVI of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man(hereinafter"American Declaration"), and that the case is admissible pursuant to the terms of Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
After examination of the factual and legal arguments advanced by the parties, and of the evidence adduced, and without prejudging the merits of the case, the IACHR concludes in this report that the case is admissible in accordance with the exception provided in Article 46(2)(a) and(c) of the American Convention.
The Commission concludes that it is competent to examine the claim submitted by the petitioners over the alleged violation of Articles 5, 8, and 25, in accordance with Article 1(1)of the Convention, and that the case is admissible pursuant to the requirements established in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The Commission concludes that it is competent to examine the claim submitted by the petitioners regarding the alleged violation of Articles 4, 5, 7, 8, and 25, in conjunction with Article 1(1)of the Convention, and that the case is admissible as per the requirements established in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
The Commission concludes that it is competent to examine the claim submitted by the petitioners regarding the alleged violation of the rights to life, humane treatment, personal liberty, protection of the family, and property,committed to the detriment of the victims, and that the case is admissible, in keeping with the requirements established at Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
After analyzing the parties' positions,the Commission concluded that it was competent to hear the petitioners' case and that said case was admissible under Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
After reviewing the positions of the parties,the Commission concluded that it was competent to hear the claim filed by the petitioners and that the case was admissible, in light of Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention.
A solidarity and community of political declarations would not in any case be admissible with elements like Fischer and co. who, in other parties as well as the German one, have had recent involvement within party leaderships of the right and centre, and whose passage to the opposition coincided with the impossibility of preserving a party leadership in agreement with the international centre, and with criticisms made by the International of their work.