|
|
 |
|
|
Implied decision (36, 37,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Implied decision
Total judgments found: 74
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4
Judgment 791
60th Session, 1986
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"[T]he rule [by which receivability hinges on the official's having exhausted the internal means of redress] is not a hard-and-fast one, even though the Statute does not expressly allow any derogation from it. The derogation should in all fairness be allowed if the complainant has done his utmost to obtain a decision, but on the evidence a decision seems unlikely to be taken in reasonable time."
Keywords:
exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 786
60th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"If a decision is taken, not within the 60 days, but at least before the complaint is filed, the complainant may not allege an implied decision [...] There is the case in which the Appeals Committee fails to report within a reasonable lapse of time: the staff member may then allege an implied decision."
Keywords:
failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; late decision; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 762
59th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"According to Article VII(3) of the Statute a staff member may appeal to the Tribunal where the administration fails to take a decision upon his claim within sixty days. [...] However, the Principal Director of personnel informed the complainants [...] of the preliminary rejection of their internal appeal and of the referral of their case to the Appeals Committee. That was an express decision which precluded an implied one and hence the application of [Article] VII(3)".
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
express decision; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; provisional decision; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 724
58th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to Article VII(3) of the Statute of the Tribunal, an official may have recourse to the Tribunal where the administration fails to take a decision upon his claim within 60 days of its notification."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 533
49th Session, 1982
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
To infer a decision to dismiss where no final decision has been taken within the sixty days would greatly broaden the scope of Article VII, paragraph 3, particularly when the internal appeals body has no set time limits. "In such case Article VII[3], which is presumably to be treated as covering the exception, would in fact become the rule. Moreover, to broaden the scope of paragraph 3 would unduly restrict that of paragraph 1, which requires the complainant to exhaust the internal means of redress."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; provision; time limit;
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complainant had filed an internal appeal. He could have appealed against an implied decision to dismiss his claim, since the only communication which he had received was wholly informative and without legal effect. He then asked for confirmation of the rejection. The President's reply did constitute an express decision, the appeal was passed on to an advisory body. At that point, the complaint becomes irreceivable. There is no longer an implied decision to challenge, and the internal means of redress have not been exhausted.
Keywords:
absence of final decision; express decision; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted;
Judgment 532
49th Session, 1982
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
Vide Judgment 533, consideration 3.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 533
Keywords:
exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; provision; time limit;
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
Vide Judgment 533, considerations 4 and 5.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 533
Keywords:
absence of final decision; express decision; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted;
Judgment 499
48th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"Article VII[1] does not lay down an absolute rule. A complainant may abandon the internal proceedings even before a decision is taken and may appeal directly to the Tribunal when the appeals body fails to report and there is no reason to suppose from the evidence that it is likely to do so within a reasonable period. But it must be quite clear from the evidence that there is no decision, and only in quite exceptional cases will the Tribunal find that the condition is met."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 451
46th Session, 1981
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The rule that a complaint shall be receivable only if the internal means of redress have been exhausted is not a hard and fast one even though the Statute does not allow any derogation from it. If a complainant does all in her power to procure a decision and if nevertheless the internal appeals body either by its statements or by its conduct evinces an intention not to give a decision within a reasonable period, justice requires that an exception should be made. [...] When the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, such an intention can be inferred."
Keywords:
administrative delay; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 421
45th Session, 1980
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Facts (D)
Extract:
"the [organisation] observes that the complainant filed his complaint before the 60 days specified in article vii, paragraph 3, of the statute of the tribunal had expired. since, however, the 60 days have now elapsed and he has not yet had a decision taken on his claim, the [organisation] will not contest the receivability of his complaint."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE ILOAT STATUTE
Keywords:
direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 279
37th Session, 1976
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
According to paragraph 3 of Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal, "where the complainant alleges failure to take a decision, or an implied decision to dismiss his appeal, the period of ninety days shall run from the expiration of the sixty days allowed for the taking of the decision by the administration."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; failure to answer claim; implied decision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 272
36th Session, 1976
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The request which the complainant addressed to the organization was never either accepted or rejected. She then filed a complaint with the Tribunal and "based it on the silence of the organization and on Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Tribunal's Statute. The organization does not dispute that the complaint falls within Article VII and accordingly, so far as that article is concerned, the complaint is receivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 263
35th Session, 1975
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal prescribes the possibility of appealing to the Tribunal where the administration fails to take a decision upon a claim within sixty days from the notification of that claim. [A provision] of the Staff Regulations [...] lays down the same rule in a different form. It provides that if a claim addressed to the Director-General or the Administrative Council has not been decided upon within sixty days of the date of its notification or submission it is deemed to be dismissed."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 255
34th Session, 1975
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The letter from the chief of personnel "is not expressed as a decision but as a letter enclosing an appraisal report [...] The complainant however did not wish to disagree with the report; he wished to contend that it was not an appraisal report at all and to claim what he called a proper report. He was within his rights in taking this course by his letter [...] and since the Director-General has failed to act upon it paragraph 3 of Article VII applies."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; omission; performance report; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 185
27th Session, 1971
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant inquired whether a refusal decision was final. the absence of a reply from the administration must be considered, by virtue of a general rule of law, as a refusal of the claim. The complainant ought to have followed the procedure prescribed in the Staff Rules to secure "a decision by the Director-General, which decision could alone be impugned before the Administrative Tribunal." [The procedure provides for appeal at the regional level and subsequently at headquarters.]
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; enforcement; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; staff regulations and rules;
Considerations
Extract:
The regional administration failed to reply because it made a reply conditional on a matter unrelated to the request. "The position thus taken up by the administration misled [the complainant] and prevented him from following the procedure laid down [in the Staff Rules]. There is all the more reason for taking account of his error inasmuch as the [...] Rules do not mention the general rule of law [...] whereby the silence of the administration after a certain period is equivalent to rejection of a claim."
Keywords:
complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; negligence; organisation; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Considerations
Extract:
Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of the same article. "[T]he provision can apply only if a complainant has exhausted all internal means of resisting the decision open to him, and if he is impugning either an explicit decision or the implicit decision resulting from the failure of the Director-General of the organization, the final competent authority, to give a ruling on his claim."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
condition; express decision; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4
|
|
|
|
|
