Übersetzung für "First defendant" in Deutsch

This was the first time a defendant before the ICTR was convicted of war crimes.

On one count of conspiracy in the first degree, the defendant is found not guilty.

On the 503 counts of murder in the first degree, the defendant is found... Not guilty.

Drazen Erdemovic was the first defendant at the ICTY to plead guilty to the charges brought against him.

The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia charged the first defendant for crimes against humanity and placed him in detention.

In response, the first defendant said that he had disagreed with this wording because no damage had ever occurred to the club.

The plaintiff, a patent agent, claimed payment of his fees and reim­bursement of expenses incurred in connexion with the said rights of the first defendant.

The first and second defendants were not only personally liable partners of the third defendant, but in addition the latter exploited the industrial property rights of the first defendant and it was in connexion with the estab­lishment and upholding of those rights that the fees and expenses were incurred.

More­over, the first defendant had not only been in contact with the plaintiff through the part­nership, but had also made payment to him.

Nor could the plaintiff argue that the defendant had submitted to the jurisdiction by entering an appearance (Article 18), since at first instance the defendant had not ap­peared at all and at second instance had appeared solely in order to contest the juris­diction of the French courts.

The first and second defendants were not only personally liable partners of the third defendant, but in addition the lat­ter exploited the industrial property rights of the first defendant and it was in connec­tion with the establishment and upholding of those rights that the fees and expenses were incurred.

The defendant first raised the objection that the Italian court lacked jurisdiction on the ground that an invoice contained a jurisdiction clause in favour of the French courts.

The Corte di cassazione held, first, that the defendant was domiciled outside Italy, since under Italian law (Article 46 of the Codice civile) and under the Convention a company's seat was to be treated as its domicile and Ford Werke had its seat in Ger­many.

Nor could the plaintiff argue that the defendant had submitted to the jurisdiction by en­tering an appearance (Article 18), since at first instance the defendant had not appeared at all and at second instance had appeared solely in order to contest the jurisdiction of the French courts.

It stated that the final judgment of the Italian court of 8 April 1975 was binding in the present proceedings for compensation in so far as it ordered the first defendant to make reparation for damage occasioned by the accident.

As a result of that accident the Italian prosecuting authorities instituted proceedings against the driver of another vehicle, the first defendant in the present action.

By a judgment of the Pretura, Caprino Veronese, of 8 April 1975 which had become final, the first defendant, who had not taken part in the proceedings, was sentenced in his absence to aterm of imprisonment and in addition he was ordered, pursuant to an application by the plaintiff, who had taken part in the proceedings as "parte civile", to pay compensation for the damage caused by the wrongful act.

The court held that the plaintiff had not succeeded in proving that the damage suffered by him had been caused by the first defendant.

However, recognition of the civil part of the judg­ment must be refused under the second paragraph of Article 26 and Article 27 (2) of the Convention and under the second paragraph of Article II of the Protocol to the Conven­tion because the first defendant had not been able to arrange for his defence in the pro­ceedings before the Italian court and, further, he had not been duly served with the docu­ment which instituted the proceedings.

The fact that it had been possible to continue with the proceedings in Italy did not lead to recognition of the judgment of 8 April 1975 since the first defendant did not have any opportunity to arrange for his defence to the claims made against him.

The first defendant was a private banking establishment with its registered office in Frankfurt am Main but which had subsequently gone into liquidation.

As a result ofthat accident the Italian prosecuting authorities instituted proceedings against the driver of another vehicle, the first defendant in the present action.

By a judgment of the Pretura, Caprino Veronese, of 8 April 1975 which had become final, the first defendant, who had not taken part in the proceedings, was sentenced in his absence to a term of imprisonment and in addition he was ordered, pursuant to an application by the plaintiff, who had taken part in the proceedings as "parte civile", to pay compensation for the damage caused by the wrongful act.

However, recognition of the civil part of the judg­ment must be refused under the second paragraph of Article 26 and Article 27 (2) of the Convention and under the second paragraph of Article II of the Protocol to the Conven­tion because the first defendant had not been able to arrange for his defence in the proceedings before the Italian court and, further, he had not been duly served with the document which instituted the proceedings.