Judgment No. 4778
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant, who was promoted from grade G.6 to grade P.3, challenges what he regards as the withdrawal of the decision to take his family allowance into account when determining his step in his new grade P.3.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
receivability of the complaint; general service category; professional category; promotion; complaint dismissed
Consideration 2
Extract:
[The organisation] asked for the present complaint to be joined to the complainant’s second complaint, which gave rise to Judgment 4777, also delivered in public this day. It is true that the factual contexts behind the two complaints converge in many respects and that, as set out below, the object of each one is redundant. However, given that the complaints involve different impugned decisions, different opinions of the Appeal Board, and provisions of the Staff Rules that are not entirely the same, and that they are based on arguments that differ in content, the Tribunal considers it appropriate to deal with the two cases separately and to render a separate judgment for each of them.
Keywords
joinder
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
The Tribunal has already recalled that, in accordance with a recognised general principle of law, a person cannot submit the same matter for decision in two separate proceedings (see, for example, Judgments 4530, consideration 7, 4085, consideration 7, 3291, consideration 6, and 2742, consideration 16).
In the present case, the object of the dispute in the complainant’s third complaint is the remuneration to which he contends he is entitled [...]. The Tribunal notes that this object is identical, to that extent, to one of the claims specifically mentioned in his second complaint [...].
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2742, 3291, 4085, 4530
Keywords
duplication of proceedings; same purpose; parallel proceedings
|
