Judgment No. 4705
Decision
The application for review is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant filed an application for review of Judgment 4274.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4274
Keywords
application for review; complaint dismissed
Considerations 2, 5, 9, 11, 12, 15
Extract:
The Tribunal’s consistent precedent has it that, pursuant to Article VI of its Statute, its judgments are “final and without appeal” and carry res judicata authority. They may be reviewed only in exceptional circumstances and on strictly limited grounds. The only admissible grounds therefor are a failure to take account of material facts, a material error (in other words, a mistaken finding of fact involving no exercise of judgement, which thus differs from misinterpretation of the facts), an omission to rule on a claim, or the discovery of new facts on which the complainant was unable to rely in the original proceedings. Moreover, these pleas must be likely to have a bearing on the outcome of the case. On the other hand, pleas of a mistake of law, failure to admit evidence, misinterpretation of the facts or omission to rule on a plea afford no grounds for review (see, for example, Judgments 4338, consideration 2, 3897, consideration 3, 3815, consideration 4, 3719, consideration 4, 3452, consideration 2, and 3001, consideration 2).
[...]
It should [...] be noted that the alleged error was not likely to have a bearing on the outcome of the case, as required by the aforementioned case law in order to establish a ground for review.
[T]he inadequacy of the reasons given for a judgment is not in any event one of the grounds for review recognised in the case law, an exhaustive list of which has been provided [...].
[T]he complainant is in fact seeking to use this argument to challenge the Tribunal’s interpretation of his written submissions, which cannot be properly challenged in an application for review [...].
[T]he Tribunal made a legal assessment which is plainly not open to challenge in an application for review.
[T]he complainant’s application for review is, for the main part, merely an attempt to re-litigate matters that were conclusively decided by the Tribunal in Judgment 4274 and must be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3001, 3452, 3719, 3815, 3897, 4274, 4338
Keywords
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review
Consideration 5
Extract:
[U]nder [the Tribunal's] case law, the fact that a plea has not previously been submitted in the internal appeal procedure does not render it irreceivable.
Keywords
new plea
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal is not required to explain systematically why it may deem necessary in a case to depart from a comparable precedent [...].
Keywords
tribunal; discretion
Consideration 14
Extract:
[I]t cannot be considered that this action constituted, in the present case, a breach of the adversarial principle, since the requests made by the Tribunal to the Organization sought only the communication of purely factual objective information and the provision of a copy of a legal text and could not, by their nature, give rise to any dispute or meaningful discussion. The proceedings relating to the case were therefore not affected by any flaws.
Keywords
adversarial proceedings
|
