Examples of using Clearly arbitrary in English and their translations into Arabic
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Political
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
It recalls that it is generally for the national tribunals, and not for the Committee, to evaluate the facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it can be ascertained that the proceedings before these tribunals were clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
It reiterates its jurisprudence that the evaluation of facts and evidence and interpretation of domestic legislation is in principle a matter to be decided by the courts of States parties, unless the evaluation of facts and evidence was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
The Committee recalls that it is generally for the appellate courts of States parties to the Covenant and not for the Committee to evaluate the facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it could be ascertained that the evaluation of evidence and the instructions to the jury were clearly arbitrary or otherwise amounted to a denial of justice.
It recalls that it is generally up to the courts of a State party to evaluate the facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it can be ascertained that such evaluation was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice, or that the court otherwise violated its obligation of independence and impartiality.
evaluation of evidence and the instructions to the jury were clearly arbitrary or otherwise amounted to a denial of justice.
With respect to the allegations under article 14, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3(e), the Committee observes that these complaints refer primarily to the appraisal of evidence adduced at the trial, a matter falling in principle to the national courts, unless the evaluation of evidence was clearly arbitrary or constituted a denial of justice.
evidence in a specific case, unless it can be ascertained that the evaluation was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
the Committee considered that, when assessing the reasonableness and proportionality of accommodation measures, States parties enjoy a certain margin of appreciation, and that it is generally for the courts of States parties to the Convention to evaluate facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it is found that the evaluation was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
The State party further refers to the established case law, according to which the Committee is not a fourth instance, and it is for the courts of States parties to interpret and apply domestic legislation in a particular case, unless it can be shown that such evaluation or application was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a manifest error or denial of justice, or that the court otherwise violated its obligation of independence and impartiality.
In this regard, the Committee recalls that it is generally not for the Committee, but for the courts of States parties, to interpret legislation and to review or to evaluate facts and evidence in a particular case, unless it can be ascertained that the conduct of the trial or the evaluation of facts and evidence was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
unless it can be ascertained that the instructions were clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
The Committee recalls that it is primarily for the appellate courts of States parties to the Covenant and not for the Committee to evaluate facts and evidence placed before the domestic courts. Similarly, it is for the appellate courts and not for the Committee to review instructions to the jury by the judge, unless it is apparent that these instructions were clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice, or that the judge otherwise violated his obligation of impartiality.
the jury were inadequate, the Committee refers to its previous jurisprudence that it is not for the Committee to review specific instructions to the jury by the trial judge unless it could be ascertained that the instructions to the jury were clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
alleged violation of article 14, paragraph 1, in that the trial judge ' s directions on the evidence to the jury were inadequate, the Committee refer[red] to its previous jurisprudence that it is not for the Committee to review specific instructions to the jury by the trial judge unless it could be ascertained that the instructions were clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice.
jury by the judge, unless it can be ascertained that the instructions to the jury were clearly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice or that the judge
Such confiscation of national identification documents is clearly arbitrary and not supported by law.
Its decision was therefore clearly arbitrary and amounted to manifest error and denial of justice.
He considers that the Court of Appeal decision is clearly arbitrary or represents a denial of justice.
s decision is clearly arbitrary or represents a denial of justice.
The Committee recalls, however, that this jurisprudence provides for an exception when it is demonstrated that the evaluation was clearly arbitrary or amounted to a manifest error