Internal appeal (86, 87, 668, 695, 752, 783,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Internal appeal
Total judgments found: 455
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 | next >
Judgment 1451
79th Session, 1995
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"In Judgment 1932 - submits the [organisation] - the Tribunal held under 18 and 24 that [...] a suit, [filed in the general interests of the civil service,] of which the hallmark is action by staff associations or agents professing to represent them, does not form part of the system of individual appeal that the organisations which have recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction commonly provide for in their rules and that the Tribunal's own Statute contemplates. The Tribunal need not revert to that case law since this is not such a complaint. It has been filed by several officials with the commendable aim of making the proceedings simpler, and each of them is defending his own individual interests, even though they are the same as the others'. The objection [to receivability for being a 'collective' complaint] fails."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1392
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union;
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The [amendment in question] strikes out of the terms of employment ipso facto the safeguard of international judicial review and vests jurisdiction in municipal courts instead. The amendment brings about an immediate and almost irreversible change in the system of appeal. So [...] every staff member has an actual and present interest in having light shed on the matter. The Tribunal affords guarantees of a system of international law within the bounds of its competence: see Judgments 1265, under 24, and 1328, under 13. It would therefore be wrong to deny the staff the right of appeal on the grounds that the impugned decision is general in purport."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1265, 1328
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; competence of tribunal; complaint; general decision; internal appeal; municipal court; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; safeguard; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;
Consideration 19
Extract:
The organisation objects to the receivability of the complaint because "the impugned decision makes amendments to the regulations and is therefore a general one about the tenor of rules. As was said in Judgment 1393, under 6 to 8, the Tribunal has often ruled on the issue, especially for the purpose of determining when the time limit starts for appeal. It has held that where a general decision gives rise to decisions affecting individuals the time limit is set off only on notification to the official of the individual decision that affects him. Moreover, as was held in Judgment 1000, under 12, the employee may, when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly, 'challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision [...] that affords the basis of the individual one'. In sum, the staff member need not ordinarily impugn at once a general decision he believes has caused him injury but may, without any risk of being time-barred, wait until the general decision affects him in the form of an individual one."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000, 1393
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; complaint; date of notification; general decision; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1450
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
Having been denied permanent appointments, the complainants are seeking compensation failing reinstatement. The EPO pleads that the claim is irreceivable for failure to exhaust the internal remedies open to them. "The EPO fails in its preliminary objection to the complainants' claim to damages. [...] It may not refuse the complainants access to the appeal procedure on the grounds that they are 'auxiliary' staff, yet say that they ought, in what amounted to preliminary appeal [...] to have demarcated the full ambit of any future litigation."
Keywords:
claim; good faith; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; material damages; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant;
Judgment 1448
79th Session, 1995
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 17-18
Extract:
"The Tribunal holds that the decision [against which the complainant submitted an internal appeal] was not a final one, the object [...] being only to initiate discussion: see Judgment 336 [...]. Although he had been identified as a staff member 'likely to be terminated', there was [...] no actual decision that he would be terminated at such and such a date or on stated terms". "He failed to submit an appeal [against the final decision] and thereby failed to exhaust the internal means of redress available to him. Accordingly, his complaint is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 336
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case law; complaint; decision; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; statement of intent;
Judgment 1443
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The complainant may not put wider claims to the Tribunal than in the internal appeal".
Keywords:
claim; complaint; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Some of the complainant's [...] procedural and substantive objections [rely on] claims and pleas [presented by] other staff whose appeals also went to the Appeals Committee. As the EPO [correctly] observes, the material issues of this complaint are [limited to] the decision he was challenging in his internal appeal."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1442
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The EPO pleads that the complaint is irreceivable on the grounds that theinternal appeal came too long after the announcement of the disputed measure and the general decision to apply it to the staff. "The objection cannot be sustained. What the complainant is impugning is not those general decisions but theapplication of them to himself which would be the consequence of the EPO's holding to its - in his view mistaken - interpretation of them."
Keywords:
complaint; general decision; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1435
79th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant wants the Tribunal to set aside the appointment of an internal candidate to a post he applied for and challenges the promotion of that candidate. "The complainant has not on any grounds challenged that promotion by way of an internal appeal and he has therefore failed to exhaust the internal remedies available to him. What is more, he has failed to show that he was adversely affected by the promotion. So the Tribunal will not in the context of this application determine whether or not the promotion was valid."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; cause of action; claim; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; lack of injury; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1434
79th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The organization denied the Appeals Board access to information and documents that were given to the Selection Board. The Tribunal holds that the complainant "was denied due process in the internal appeal proceedings, and for that he was entitled to redress. the organization did not offer him any. The Tribunal will therefore award him 3,000 United States dollars in moral damages".
Keywords:
compensation; confidential evidence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; moral injury; procedural flaw; selection board;
Judgment 1433
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Article VII (1) of the Tribunal's Statute requires that for a complaint to be receivable the complainant must have 'exhausted such other means of resisting a final decision as are open to him under the applicable staff regulations'. The Tribunal recognises that reasonable time must be allowed for completing the internal appeal procedure. Yet in this case [fifteen months had passed between the date of the complainant's internal appeal and the organization's response to the appeal] objections to receivability ill become the defendant".
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; date; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; reply;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant was kept waiting over sixteen months [...] for an answer to his request [...] and fifteen months for the [organisation] to file its reply [...] to his appeal [...] and so let the internal appeal procedure go ahead. The Tribunal holds that since he took all the steps he could take to obtain a final decision and since the [organisation] failed to discharge promptly its obligations under the internal procedure he was justified in coming to the Tribunal. That is in keeping with what the Tribunal ruled in, for example, Judgment 1243 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1243
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; date; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; reply;
Judgment 1429
79th Session, 1995
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
See Judgment 1244.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1244
Keywords:
case law; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; interpretation; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1404
78th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant appealed to the Headquarters Appeals Board before the Regional Board had issued its report. "The complainant's own behaviour affected the regional proceedings and made for delay in the Regional Board's report and recommendation to the Regional Director. Not to be ignored either is the effect of the change in membership, which fell within the time allotted for hearing the case. On the evidence the complainant has failed to show that the Board did not intend to report within a reasonable time."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; composition of the internal appeals body; delay; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; time limit;
Judgment 1399
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"Inasmuch as Rule VI 1.01 [of the Staff Regulations] confers the right of appeal on 'every member of the personnel' it may be that someone does forfeit that right on leaving the organization and so ceasing to be a staff member provided that the issues they are objecting to or the decisions they are challenging did not occur before they left. There is no danger thereby of any miscarriage of justice since [...] a former official who alleges breach of contract or of the rules he was subject to may still come to the Tribunal."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF REGULATION VI 1.01
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; former official; internal appeal; locus standi; ratione personae; right of appeal; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"CERN's refusal to produce minutes of meetings of the Joint Advisory Appeals Board in no way impaired [the complainant's] interests insofar as the hearings were recorded on tape to which [the organization] has expressly allowed him access from the outset. [...] Even though such practice is not in line with Regulation R VI 1.09 the omission is not in the circumstances a serious one."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN REGULATION R VI 1.09
Keywords:
cause of action; consequence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; practice; procedure before the tribunal; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1393
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"There is no reason of public policy why an organisation should not entertain a claim, even when it is premature, pending the notification of an individual decision. That is the approach that the EPO took when, instead of warning the complainant forthwith that his appeal was premature, it entertained his claims - just as it entertained all the others - and forwarded them, after what it described as preliminary study, to the Appeals Committee. So it was in breach of good faith in objecting to receivability before the Committee at a time when the time limits set off by its individual decisions had already run out. The Tribunal accordingly holds that under the circumstances the complainant is right to plead that he was caught in a procedural trap."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; date; general decision; good faith; individual decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 7
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1279, consideration 9.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1279
Keywords:
case law; general decision; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Consistent rulings by the Tribunal make it plain that the act which is challengeable and so sets off the time limit will ordinarily be some individual decision notified to the staff member. Only that decision affords him unquestionable and final notice that the time limit is set off and that he will have to act if he wants to assert his rights."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 323, 398, 624, 625, 626, 902, 963, 1081, 1101, 1134, 1148
Keywords:
case law; cause of action; date of notification; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1392
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
"The appeal procedure set forth in the Service Regulations is, to quote Article 106, an individual appeals system. Such too is the basic feature of the system of appeal embodied in Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal, though it is subject to the provision in Article VII(2) setting a special time limit for appeal against any decision affecting a 'class of officials', which runs from the date of issue. So it is only by virtue of an individual contract of employment with the organisation that someone may lodge a complaint and the complainant may not alter the nature of the suit by declaring when he files the complaint that he is doing so as a staff union representative."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II AND ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 106 OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; general decision; iloat statute; internal appeal; locus standi; publication; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; start of time limit; time limit; tribunal;
Judgment 1391
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Decisions taken by the organisation are subject to review on grounds such as bias, bad faith, malice and abuse of authority. When seeking to defend his interests by impugning any such decision, an employee is entitled to allege and attempt to establish such grounds. A fair decision cannot be reached upon such matters by an internal appeals body or by this Tribunal if witnesses, parties and their representatives are unable to speak candidly and without the risk of incurring a penalty for what they may say, and especially if one party is unduly inhibited by the fear that failure to prove his case my make him liable to disciplinary action by the other party."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; burden of proof; complainant; complaint; disciplinary measure; evidence; freedom of speech; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; misuse of authority; submissions; testimony; tribunal;
Judgment 1383
78th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-10
Extract:
The organization contends that the Tribunal lacks competence to hear a complaint from a "temporary adviser", whose status does not imply the right of appeal. But the Tribunal finds that the organization has described her "as holding an appointment as [a] short-term consultant. [...] Her contract was for a total of over ninety days, she was therefore not a 'temporary advisory' whithin the meaning of [WHO Manual paragraph] II.12.590." holding a "temporary short-term appointment as a consultant [...] she therefore qualified as a 'staff member'" with the right to appeal. "The rules draw no distinction between 'regular' staff members and the holders of temporary appointments."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO MANUAL PARAGRAPH II.12.590
Keywords:
duration of appointment; external collaborator; internal appeal; locus standi; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; short-term; staff member; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1380
78th Session, 1995
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant is seeking material and moral damages. The Tribunal observes that she made no such claim during the internal appeals proceedings and holds that her claim "is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute because she has not exhausted the internal means of appeal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
claim; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; material damages; moral injury; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant says that "the administration failed to observe the time limit of sixty days when it replied to the Joint Appeals Board on [two appeals she had lodged], in breach of Rule 112.02(b)(ii). This provision has no application to the organization's reply in the internal appeals procedure: the time limit of sixty days applies to the Director-General's reply to a written request under Rule 112.02(a) for review of an administrative decision."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: STAFF RULE 112.02
Keywords:
due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules; time limit;
Judgment 1379
78th Session, 1995
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant "has neither asked for review of [the impugned decision] nor lodged an internal appeal against it. So she has not exhausted the internal means of redress which were available to her, and her complaint is [...] irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1376
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
The purpose of Headquarters Board of Appeal's rules of procedure is "to promote the expeditious and orderly hearing of appeals, not to deprive appellants of any right of appeal conferred on them by the Staff Rules."
Keywords:
due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; purpose; right of appeal; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; time limit;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"According to the case law - see for example Judgment 607 [...] under 8 - though the rules on internal appeals must be respected because proper administration so requires, 'they are not supposed to be a trap or a means of catching out a staff member who acts in good faith'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 607
Keywords:
case law; good faith; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; right of appeal; staff member's interest; time limit;
Judgment 1372
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"As the Tribunal held in Judgments 1177 [...], under 5, and 1323 [...], under 9, an item that forms part of the proceedings that led to the impugned decision may not be withheld from scrutiny by the Tribunal. That holds good for any appellate body. So the administration ought to have disclosed to the Regional Board the documents it required to enable it to take up the complainant's appeal properly."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1177, 1323
Keywords:
case law; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; moral injury; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1370
77th Session, 1994
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"Judgment 1317 [...] brought out the need for a properly functioning internal appeal procedure, of which the Appeal Board is an essential part. In this case the Board took far too long to report and failed to perform its function properly. Although in the circumstances the shortcomings of the appeal procedure may not be deemed to constitute bad faith, the ITU was negligent and caused the complainant injury. On that account it must afford him redress."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1317
Keywords:
case law; compensation; delay; flaw; good faith; injury; internal appeal; internal appeals body; moral injury; negligence; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; report; staff member's interest;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 | next >
|
