On 6 October 2000, upon appeal, the Borgarting Court of Appeal upheld this decision.

The decision of the enforcement branch shall stand pending the decision on appeal.

On 18 October 2002, the Central District Court of Minsk rejected the authors' appeal against the C.R.N. 's decision on the same grounds this decision was in turn affirmed on appeal.

The Court of Appeal based its decision on the following grounds.

9 Decision on Joseph Nzabirinda's Notice of Appeal , 28 January 2005.

10 Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Regarding Temporal Jurisdiction , 29 July 2004.

3 Decision on Mugiraneza's Interlocutory Appeal against the Decision of the Trial Chamber on Exclusion of Evidence , 15 July 2004.

On appeal, the Frankfurt Court of Appeal quashed that decision and referred the matter back to the Frankfurt Regional Court.

The decision contained instructions on how to appeal to the Supreme Court.

8 Decision on Pauline Nyiramasuhuko's Appeal on the Admissibility of Evidence , 4 October 2004.

On 2 September 2002, the Appeal Aliens Board upheld the Migration Board's decision.

The decision adds that the appeal hearing was held on 3 June 1996.

On 7 March 2001, the Federal Court dismissed an appeal against the decision of RRT.

The applicant did not appeal against this decision.

On 15 July 2004, the Appeals Chamber rendered a decision on Mugiraneza's appeal against the decision of the Trial Chamber on exclusion of evidence by directing the Trial Chamber to reconsider Mugiraneza's request.3 The Appeals Chamber also dismissed the Prosecutor's counter appeal.

On 16 August 2001, the Full Federal Court dismissed an appeal against the Federal Court's decision.

Mr. Marynich appealed this decision to the Minsk Prosecutor, who rejected the appeal on 20 August 2004.

On 17 March 2004, the State party informed the Committee that, by decision of 17 February 2004, the Board of Appeal dismissed the author's application for leave to appeal against the High Court's decision of 1 December 2003.

The CBC appealed the decision, but later abandoned the appeal.

71 1967 on administrative proceedings and that it was not possible to appeal against a non existent decision.

He then filed an appeal in the Prague Town Court, which quashed this decision on 5 May 2004.

On 24 June 1998, she lodged an appeal against the Torun District Court's decision of 5 February 1998.

On 7 September 2004, an appeal against the decision of the Central District of Minsk Court was rejected.

2.16 On 17 March 2004, the Board of Appeal rejected Mr. Warming's application for leave to appeal the Grindsted District Court's decision to the High Court of Western Denmark.

2.3 The authors' appeal against this decision was rejected by the Court of Eastern Finland on 20 September 1989.

On 1 December 20003, the High Court of Eastern Denmark dismissed the author's appeal against the City Court's decision.

5 Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Regarding Application of Joint Criminal Enterprise to the Crime of Genocide , 22 October 2004.

The Court of Appeal of Quebec rejected the appeal against the conviction and the Supreme Court of Canada refused the application for leave to appeal against this decision.

2.4 On appeal, the Superior Court of the District of Bedford, on 13 April 2000, reversed the decision of the lower court.

2.9 On 2 October 2000, the Frankfurt Court of Appeal dismissed the authors' immediate appeal, in the absence of a legal error in the impugned decision of the Frankfurt Regional Court.

4.2 The State party notes that such an appeal could have been lodged as soon as the decision had been notified the decision contained an indication of the appeal procedure and deadlines.

The Prosecutor's decision contained no indication of a possibility of further appeal.

Mr. Rindal did not appeal the District Court's decision in his case.

On 19 October 1998, the Torun Provincial Court similarly rejected the author's appeal against the decision of the Regional Court.

An appeal against a decision on the extradition or temporary extradition of a person, and verification of its legality (article 504)

11 Decision on Validity of Appeal Pursuant to Rule 72 (E) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence , 30 September 2004.

On 13 April 1999, the High Court upheld the District Court's decision, and on 20 August 1999, the Supreme Court dismissed the author's appeal.

On these points, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal and gave additional reasoning on the foreseeability of the damages.

According to the State party, no cassation appeal was introduced against this decision.

He claims that he was denied the right to appeal from this decision.

2.9 On 15 July 1998, the author filed an appeal against the District's court decision (of 30 June 1998) in the Tashkent City Court and on 10 September, the City Court upheld the decision.

On 28 February 2002, the complainant withdrew an application to the High Court for leave to appeal the Full Federal Court's decision.

Should the plaintiff be dissatisfied with a trial court decision, he may go before a court of appeal, which rules on appeals

The Appeals Chamber held that the impugned decision was without interlocutory appeal and that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the Appellant's Notice of Appeal.9

The Government appealed this decision, invoking a regulation that unilaterally stayed the immigration judge's bond decision until final resolution of the appeal.