Judgment No. 1255
Decision
1. THE ORGANIZATION SHALL PAY EACH OF THE COMPLAINANTS 517 RUPEES.
2. THE ORGANIZATION SHALL PAY EACH OF THEM 100 UNITED STATES DOLLARS IN COSTS.
3. THEIR OTHER CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED.
4. THE INTERVENERS SHALL HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS THE COMPLAINANTS INSOFAR AS THEY ARE IN LIKE CASE IN LAW AND IN FACT.
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Judgments are 'final and without appeal' according to Article VI of the Statute of the Tribunal and they carry the authority of res judicata. The Tribunal will therefore entertain an application for review only in quite exceptional circumstances. As it has stated many times, and in detail in Judgment 442 [...], the admissible grounds for review of a judgment are strictly limited: they are failure to take account of some material fact, a mistaken finding of fact that involves no exercise of judgment, omission to rule on a claim and the discovery of some new essential fact which the complainant was unable to rely on in the original proceedings. Moreover, the applicant's plea must be such as to affect the original ruling."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VI OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 442
Keywords
application for review; admissible grounds for review; res judicata; iloat statute
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The grounds which are not admissible for an application for review are an alleged mistake of law, misinterpretation of the facts, failure to admit evidence and omission to comment on a plea."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 442
Keywords
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The complainants dispute the Tribunal's finding in Judgment 1190, under 15, that no breach of the methodology which they were relying on had caused them any injury. [...] Since Judgment 1190 therefore shows a mistake of fact, it is subject to review in that respect".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1190
Keywords
application for review; admissible grounds for review; res judicata; mistake of fact
| 
