Judgment No. 4689
Decision
The application for review is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant filed an application for review of Judgment 4227.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4227
Keywords
application for review; complaint dismissed
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant has filed an application with the Tribunal for review of Judgment 4227. For a considerable time, the process of review was not expressly recognised in the Tribunal’s Statute, but it now is in Article VI by an amendment made by the International Labour Conference on 7 June 2016. However, the settled principles governing the process of review have been developed by the Tribunal over time and before the amendment and continue to apply. As the Tribunal most recently observed in consideration 2 of Judgment 4440: “[P]ursuant to Article VI of its Statute, the Tribunal’s judgments are ‘final and without appeal’ and have res judicata authority. They may therefore be reviewed only in exceptional circumstances and on strictly limited grounds. As stated, for example, in Judgments 1178, 1507, 2059, 2158 and 2736, the only admissible grounds for review are failure to take account of material facts, a material error involving no exercise of judgement, an omission to rule on a claim, or the discovery of new facts which the complainant was unable to rely on in the original proceedings. Moreover, these pleas must be likely to have a bearing on the outcome of the case. Pleas of a mistake of law, failure to admit evidence, misinterpretation of the facts or omission to rule on a plea, on the other hand, afford no grounds for review (see, for example, Judgments 3001, [consideration] 2, 3452, [consideration] 2, and 3473, [consideration] 3).”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1178, 1507, 2059, 2158, 2736, 3001, 3452, 3473, 4227, 4440
Keywords
application for review
Consideration 4
Extract:
[F]or the complainant to fall within the very narrowly framed grounds of review, it would have been necessary for him to establish that the factual findings of the Appeals Committee were not available on the evidence. It is not sufficient for the complainant to seek to demonstrate, as he does, that other factual findings could have been made had the evidence been viewed and assessed differently.
Keywords
application for review
|
