Examples of using First instance trial in English and their translations into French
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
First instance trial.
Justice in jeopardy: The first instance trial of Victoire Ingabire.
First instance trial judge in criminal and civil cases.
Half a month before the trial of the first instance trial Cuong was accused of.
Mr. Quan's first instance trial was scheduled for 9 July 2013.
The authors submitted motions similar to the ones presented during the first instance trial.
During the first instance trial the authors were represented by court appointed lawyers.
After being condemned in Oslo in 2013 at the end of the first instance trial to 21 years in jail, Bugingo appealed.
Erwin Sperisen's first instance trial was held from 15 May to 6 June 2014 before the Criminal Court of Geneva, composed of seven judges.
Having regard to the Amnesty International report‘Justice in jeopardy: The first instance trial of Victoire Ingabire' of 2013.
In line with the decrease in first instance trial activity, the proposal envisages a substantial reduction in staff in 2009.
The applicant lost the case at the Trademark Review andAdjudication Board as well as the first instance trial court and high court.
The authors submit that two months before the first instance trial, press articles appeared quoting the investigator and referring to them as guilty.
The delegation was told that Mr. Zorig's family had been able to access the prosecution evidence between September andDecember 2016 after the investigation was concluded and before the first instance trial.
Her defence team argued that the first instance trial verdict was based on contradictory and incoherent testimonies, and called for a reconsideration of the evidence.
On 14 May 2009, President Byron submitted the latest version ofthe Tribunal's Completion Strategy, which maintains the goal of completing the evidence phase in all but one first instance trial by the end of 2009.
Front Line Defenders observed part of the first instance trial and reported grave violations of the judicial proceedings and of the right to a fair trial. .
That policy is aimed at facilitating the referral of cases to competent national jurisdictions in order toallow the Tribunal achieve its current objective of completing all first instance trial activities in 2008.
The first instance trial concluded with a detailed judgment(comprising more than 130 pages) based on overwhelming evidence and with a life imprisonment sentence.
On 27 February 2014,the defense wished to quash the decision of the first instance trial on the ground that the judge was a civilian whereas being a military case, it should have been a military judge.
The author further states that the State party failed to point out how the presiding judge of the Court of Appeal was able to perform a full review of the initial verdict, as he was not provided with a properly motivated judgment anda trial transcript of the first instance trial.
During the first instance trial(2001) and subsequent appeal(2002), the legal ordering party had expressly asked the lawyers not to put in question the report given by the Louvre experts.
The author further submits that the higher tribunal did not have a transcript of the first instance trial, and therefore could not re-evaluate the evidence on which his conviction was based.
Completing first instance trial activity earlier will make it possible for appeals proceedings in the final cases to start earlier than anticipated and, by extension, shorten the completion date of all proceedings.
The second instance courtalso ignored their motions, identical to the ones made during the first instance trial, and had the same"accusative tendency" as the first instance, literally adopting the position of the investigation and prosecution.
The author claims that in his case a substantive assessment has not taken place nor could it have taken place, as the higher tribunal did not possess a properly reasoned judgment of the court of first instance, a statement of the evidence used, or a transcript of the first instance trial.
The Committee notes the author's claim that during the first instance trial the court refused to hear several witnesses which could have confirmed his innocence and that the court only accepted and evaluated evidence that supported the prosecution's version of the events.
In the instant case, it notes that the first suspect was not interrogated and the criminal procedure was not initiated until 40 months after the death of the victim; an indictment against the possible perpetrators was not raised until 21 January 2008,nearly five years after the death of the victim; and the first instance trial had not started as of June 2009.
The Committee notes the author's allegations that there were violations of hisrights under article 14(paras. 1 and 3(d)) of the Covenant during the first instance trial and that the conditions of detention in the Bayil prison violated his rights under articles 7 and 10(paras. 1 and 3) of the Covenant.
The Committee notes the author's claims that the presumption of innocence with regardto him was violated, since there were publications and broadcasts in the media during the first instance trial declaring that he was guilty of the crimes he was convicted of later and since the State party's authorities referred to him as having"committed" crimes already at the pretrial stage of the proceedings.