Examples of using Ruling dated in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
In a ruling dated 25 July 2006, this request was rejected.
However, the Federal Tribunal, in a ruling dated 18 June 1985, ATF 111 II 245 appended.
In a ruling dated 17 March 1995, Murcia employment tribunal No. 3 rejected the author's claim.
The author reiterates his arguments that he has never seen orsigned a similar ruling dated 25 December 2008.
In a ruling dated 21 October 2004, the court ordered the principal of the lycée to convene a disciplinary board.
The State party maintains that the constitutionality of Act No. 790 was verifiedby the Constitutional Court, which declared the Act enforceable in a ruling dated 1 October 2003.
In a ruling dated 6 July 2001 the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court denied the appeal in cassation.
Noting, however, that the complainant's allegations were not accompanied by any supporting evidence,the Administrative Court subsequently rejected the appeal in a ruling dated 8 November 2001.
They point out that, in a ruling dated 15 July 2008, the Constitutional Court declared the proposed amendment unconstitutional.
According to the State party, Act No. 1/1991, which established the liquidationof the COLPUERTOS enterprise, was declared constitutional by the Constitutional Court in its ruling dated 21 January 1993.
In a ruling dated 4 August 2006, the interim relief judge rejected the request for a stay of execution of the decision.
With regard to the three decisions handed down by the Zaragoza Transport Arbitration Board on 29 November 1993, the author also appealed to Zaragoza Court of First Instance No. 1,which rejected the appeal in a ruling dated 2 June 1994.
The Press Council in a ruling dated for release as 26 March 2010, upheld parts of the complaint, determining that the article is"inaccurate and biased.
In a ruling dated 15 December 1999, the Court of Appeal of Bastia upheld the guilty verdict against the authors, but found that the offence described as fraud in fact constituted an abuse of trust.
In order to supplement the information, I have the honour to transmit to you the Supreme Court ruling dated 30 October 1994 rejecting the appeal by the Public Prosecutor's Department against the decision of the Provincial Court of Barcelona of 29 June 1993, which you have already received.
In a ruling dated 5 August 2006, the interim relief judge rejected the request for a stay of execution of the decision, and the complainant was finally deported to Tunisia on 7 August 2006.
In a communication dated 22 September 2005, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Liberia conveyed a ruling dated 16 September 2005 whereby the Supreme Court of Liberia decided to grant a peremptory writ of prohibition, thus preventing the National Transitional Government from implementing the assets-freeze measures by the procedure it had previously adopted.
In a ruling dated 28 September 1998, the Constitutional Court rejected the appeal on the grounds that"the contested judgement[was] one in a series of judgements, some predating it, some postdating it, which[had] effectively changed case law on the interpretation and application of the relevant legislation on recognition in Spain of dental qualifications from Latin American and, specifically, Dominican, universities, which[meant it could not] be viewed as an isolated or ad casum decision.
The Committee also welcomes the fact that, since the adoption of its ruling dated 1 June 2002, the Criminal Division of the Court of Cassation has allowed the practice of discrimination testing as a form of evidence in the area of racial discrimination, and encourages the State party to promote more frequent recourse to it.
In the judge's ruling dated the same day, the prisoner's request for a visit by his girlfriend under surveillance was denied on the grounds that it could impair the investigation.
At the same time, there is a court ruling dated by late XVIII century, where a girl who was raised in a Muslim family since she had been 7 proclaimed herself a non-Muslim, and married a non-Muslim man.
In a ruling dated 6 May 2004, the Benghazi Appeals Court determined it was not competent to pronounce on the matter since the offence had not been committed within the area under its jurisdiction, but in the jurisdiction of the Tripoli Appeals Court.
In a ruling dated 8 November 1988 the Federal Tribunal held that trade unions have the capacity, subject to certain conditions, to initiate proceedings in the courts to have victimization of their members stopped. Ruling published in Praxis, No. 83, April 1989, p. 293.
As to the Council of State, a ruling dated 30 June 1989(City of Paris, Paris Social Assistance Office v. Monsieur Lévy) refers to the scope of the principle that the users of a public service or beneficiaries of public assistance should be treated equally.
In a ruling dated 20 January 2003, the Supreme Court found that the author's guilt had been established on the basis of lawfully obtained evidence which had been assessed by the court and that the assessment of evidence was a matter for the sentencing court, not the Supreme Court.
In a ruling dated 1 June 2002, the Criminal Division of the Court of Cassation allowed the practice of discrimination testing as a form of evidence, on the grounds that the principle of unconstrained evidence should prevail in criminal proceedings pursuant to article 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In a ruling dated 18 October 2000, the criminal division of the Court of Cassation rejected an appeal by the authors, stating that the ground of the appeal, namely that both Mr. and Ms. Mesclet had acted in the case, was based on a purely technical error in the reference material accompanying the ruling.
In a ruling dated 5 September 1991, the court rejected these requests, noting inter alia that the Community regulations invoked by the author related only to nationals of one State who were working in another, and that this did not apply to Mr. B. Veriter, a French citizen working in France.
In a ruling dated 29 September 2005, the Council of State declared the application to be inadmissible on the ground that the contested act constituted a preliminary act that was indivisible from the deliberation of the panel that decides on the results of the competitive examination and, as such, could not be appealed.
The City Court dismissed the appeal by a ruling dated 6 August 1996, on the ground that the decision had been properly served the first time and should not have been served a second time. On 11 October 1996, the author filed a constitutional complaint, which was dismissed by the Constitutional Court as inadmissible ratione temporis.