|
|
 |
|
|
Inadmissible grounds for review (13, 9, 11, 17, 567, 757,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Inadmissible grounds for review
Total judgments found: 52
< previous | 1, 2, 3
Judgment 748
59th Session, 1986
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"As is clear from precedent the absence of a ruling on issues that are not material affords no grounds for review."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 665
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
Judgment 705
57th Session, 1985
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Several pleas are inadmissible as grounds for review, such as allegations of error of law or misappraisal of the evidence. Nor does the failure to hear evidence or to rule on pleas submitted by the parties afford admissible grounds for review. Other pleas may be admissible provided they may have an effect on the Tribunal's decision. Examples are failure to take account of specific facts, material error [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 607
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
Judgment 704
57th Session, 1985
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
See Judgment 705, consideration 2.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 705
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
Judgment 658
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"The Tribunal's judgments are subject to review only in exceptional cases. Failure to take account of a specific fact, a material error, failure to rule on a claim or the discovery of a new fact may be treated as admissible grounds for review; but an error of law, misappraisal of evidence, failure to take account of evidence and failure to answer a plea may not."
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
Judgment 609
52nd Session, 1984
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 1, 2 and 4
Extract:
"By [its] judgment, the Tribunal ordered the organization to pay to the complainant $40,000 as 'compensation for the unlawful termination of his contract' and also $6,000 as costs." The organization paid that sum to the complainant in execution of the said judgment. The complainant seeks reimbursement for any taxes he might have to pay on the sum. "No obscurity in the judgment is alleged or identified. [...] The argument does not attempt to bring the case within the very limited grounds on which the tribunal permits reconsideration or review." The complaint is dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 523
Keywords:
application for interpretation; application for review; execution of judgment; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; material damages; refund; tax;
Judgment 593
51st Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Neither the Statute nor the Rules of Court provide for review of the Tribunal's judgments. Although an application for review may nevertheless be entertained, only certain pleas will be admitted. In particular, an alleged mistake of law affords no grounds for review. To allow an application for review on the grounds of the Tribunal's reasoning would be to permit anyone who was dissatisfied with a decision to question it indefinitely in disregard of the principle of res judicata."
Keywords:
application for review; exception; inadmissible grounds for review; misinterpretation of the facts; mistake of law; no provision;
Judgment 590
51st Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"By a letter [...] the complainant wrote to regret that his case had been incorrectly ruled by the Tribunal and to assert that the dismissal of his complaint was not justified. Treating this letter as an application for further review, the Tribunal finds no grounds therein for any further review."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 547
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
Judgment 579
51st Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The grounds upon which the complainant seeks review, viz. the error of his being placed by the Selection Committee in [a particular category], the failure of the Selection Committee to screen his case properly and the refusal of the Tribunal to summon witnesses whom the complainant did not call at the hearing by the [Internal Appeal Board], are not grounds for review."
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review; misinterpretation of the facts; oral proceedings; refusal; tribunal;
Judgment 536
49th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"One of [the complainant's] arguments is that the Tribunal was not correctly constituted when it delivered Judgment No. 404" and that because of various other defects the judgment is null and void. "This is a plea she might have put forward in the written proceedings in her fourth complaint, which culminated in Judgment No. 442. It is therefore not admissible."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404, 442
Keywords:
application for review; composition of the internal appeals body; inadmissible grounds for review; recusal; tribunal;
Judgment 443
46th Session, 1981
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Inadmissible grounds for review include an alleged mistake of law, an alleged mistake in appraisal of the facts, a failure to admit evidence and the omission to comment on pleas submitted by the parties.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 325
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
Summary
Extract:
The complainant objects that the Tribunal omitted to take account of one line in an item of evidence. He thus objects to the Tribunal's evaluation of evidence, which is not a plea which can afford grounds for review.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 325
Keywords:
application for review; appraisal of evidence; inadmissible grounds for review;
Judgment 442
46th Session, 1981
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2 and 8(B)
Extract:
Among inadmissible grounds for review is alleged mistaken appraisal of the facts, i.e. the interpretation which the Tribunal has put on the facts. Parties who are dissatisfied with a decision may not question it indefinitely in disregard of the principle of res judicata.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; appraisal of facts; definition; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; misinterpretation of the facts; res judicata;
Consideration 1
Extract:
Neither the Statute nor the Rules of Court provide for review of the Tribunal's judgments. Is it to be inferred that review is thereby precluded or simply left for the Tribunal itself to determine ? The Tribunal "has heard several applications for review, but has dismissed them simply by finding that there were no grounds for review. It has not yet discussed in full the scope for review of its judgments." In the present case the problem will be dealt with in part by citing the pleas which are not receivable and reserving judgment on the others.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; iloat statute; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; no provision;
Consideration 12
Extract:
By contending that the Tribunal did not order an expert medical inquiry, the complainant objects that a particular means of obtaining evidence was not used. But the failure to admit evidence is not a valid reason for review.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; expert inquiry; failure to admit evidence; inadmissible grounds for review;
Consideration 2
Extract:
"To allow an application for review on the grounds of the Tribunal's legal reasoning would be to permit anyone who was dissatisfied with a decision to question it indefinitely in disregard of the principle of res judicata."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; mistake of law; request by a party; res judicata;
Consideration 2
Extract:
Inadmissible grounds for review include an alleged mistake of law, an alleged mistake in appraisal of the facts, a failure to admit evidence and the omission to comment on pleas submitted by the parties.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; appraisal of evidence; appraisal of facts; failure to admit evidence; inadmissible grounds for review; mistake of law;
Judgment 201
30th Session, 1973
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he sole grounds adduced by [the complainant] in support of his complaint could have been put forward during the proceeding terminated by Judgment No. 189. His application for a review of the judgment is therefore irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 189
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review;
< previous | 1, 2, 3
|
|
|
|
|
