|
|
 |
|
|
Execution of judgment (134, 745,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Execution of judgment
Total judgments found: 77
1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
Judgment 4747
137th Session, 2024
International Olive Council
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgment 4447.
Considerations 1 & 9
Extract:
The Tribunal’s case law establishes that, according to the provisions of Article VI of its Statute, the Tribunal’s judgments are “final and without appeal”, and they are therefore “immediately operative”; the principle that its judgments are immediately operative is also a corollary of their res judicata authority. For this reason, international organizations which have recognized the Tribunal’s jurisdiction are bound to take whatever action a judgment may require (see, for example, Judgment 3152, consideration 11, and the case law cited therein). The parties must work together in good faith to this end and the execution of a judgment must occur within a reasonable time, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, especially the nature and the scope of the action which the organization is required to take (see, for example, Judgments 3656, consideration 3, 3066, consideration 6, and 2684, considerations 4 and 6).
[...]
[I]t is obvious to the Tribunal that, by 9 September 2022, the IOC had done what was necessary towards the execution of order 2 of the decision in Judgment 4447 and consideration 15 of that judgment in good faith and within a reasonable time, given all of the circumstances.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2684, 3066, 3152, 3656
Keywords:
application for execution; execution of judgment;
Judgment 4656
136th Session, 2023
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: ITU has filed an application for the interpretation of order 2 of the decision contained in Judgment 4515.
Consideration 4
Extract:
[I]n light of the Tribunal’s guidance, in Judgment 2988, consideration 4, [...] an organization’s duty to calculate staff salaries and benefits in accordance with its regulations and rules applies equally to the calculation of the amount due for salary and benefits pursuant to a judgment of the Tribunal.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2988
Keywords:
allowance; execution of judgment; payment; salary;
Judgment 4558
134th Session, 2022
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to reimburse the costs incurred in connection with his third complaint to the Tribunal.
Consideration 9
Extract:
With regard to the complainant’s additional claim for payment of moral damages in the amount of 5,000 euros, the Tribunal notes that, in Judgment 4324, consideration 3, it stated as follows:
“[...] international organisations that have recognised the Tribunal’s jrisdiction are bound to take whatever action the decision in a judgment may require, which must be executed by the parties as ruled [...]”
It is true that consideration 9 of Judgment 4256 is not part of the decision in that judgment. This is not, however, a reason to ignore the meaning and scope of the Tribunal’s finding that “[s]uch costs should be considered in the resumed internal appeal proceedings”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4256, 4324
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Judgment 4413
132nd Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgments 3887 and 3986, and the EPO filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3887, as clarified by Judgment 3986.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
application filed by the organisation; application for execution; execution of judgment;
Consideration 10
Extract:
The application for interpretation filed by the EPO, as based on the impossibility to execute Judgments 3887 and 3986, raises a threshold issue. The Tribunal finds that the two facts reported above under consideration 7 and proven by the EPO, have rendered impossible the complete execution of the two judgments. In the unusual circumstances of this case, the Tribunal will make no further orders for the execution of Judgments 3887 and 3986. Firstly, forcing Mr B. to undergo a medical examination would impair his fundamental rights to dignity and health. Secondly, the refusal of psychiatric experts to carry out an examination only on the basis of documents was an objective obstacle that made it impossible to fully execute the judgments. Neither of these obstacles can be attributed to the EPO. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that the EPO could do nothing more to execute the judgments, and Mr B.’s application for execution must be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3887, 3986
Keywords:
application for execution; execution of judgment; medical opinion;
Judgment 4410
132nd Session, 2021
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgment 4065.
Consideration 6
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls that in Judgment 4065 it ordered the parties to meet so that the complainant can complete the defence orally. Judgment 4292 confirmed this. To execute this obligation, both parties must comply with it. As the complainant continually refuses to attend such a meeting because he wants something else which does not arise from Judgment 4065 its execution is being made impossible (see, inter alia, Judgments 3261, consideration 16, and 3824, consideration 4). In the Tribunal’s view, the FAO has, by inviting the complainant to meet, done its part in an attempt to organise the discussion foreseen by Manual paragraph 330.3.26. The complainant failed to cooperate. There is nothing else the FAO can do to organise a meeting and the judgment is deemed executed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3261, 3824, 4065, 4292
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Judgment 4388
131st Session, 2021
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: IFAD filed an application for interpretation of Judgments 4341 and 4342.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that in Judgment 4324, consideration 5, it was said: “When an organisation is required to take a new decision after a case has been referred back to it by a judgment of the Tribunal, if the applicable provisions have been amended in the meantime, the organisation must take that decision in compliance with the procedure now in force (see, for example, Judgment 3896, consideration 4).”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3896, 4324
Keywords:
applicable law; execution of judgment;
Judgment 4387
131st Session, 2021
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants filed applications for execution of Judgment 4155.
Consideration 4
Extract:
WIPO submits, correctly, that the orders were self-executing at least in the sense that the orders of the Tribunal themselves nullified the two decisions and their effect as well as the results of the elections. Nothing further was required of WIPO or the Director General to enliven or perfect the orders.
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Judgment 4324
130th Session, 2020
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The applicant seeks execution in full of Judgments 3045 and 3792 and recognition that the disease which led to his invalidity status is occupational.
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that, under Article VI of its Statute, its judgments are “final and without appeal”, and they are therefore “immediately operative”, as its earliest case law established (see, in particular, Judgment 82, consideration 6). The Tribunal has further noted that the principle that its judgments are immediately operative is also a corollary of their res judicata authority. Thus, international organisations that have recognised the Tribunal’s jurisdiction are bound to take whatever action the decision in a judgment may require, which must be executed by the parties as ruled (see Judgments 553, consideration 1, 1328, consideration 12, 1338, consideration 11, 3152, consideration 11, and also 4235, consideration 9, and the case law cited therein). Judgments must be executed within a reasonable period of time (see Judgment 3656, consideration 3).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 82, 553, 1328, 1338, 3152, 3656, 4235
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
When an organisation is required to take a new decision after a case has been referred back to it by a judgment of the Tribunal, if the applicable provisions have been amended in the meantime, the organisation must take that decision in compliance with the procedure now in force (see, for example, Judgment 3896, consideration 4).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3896
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; applicable law; execution of judgment;
Judgment 4298
130th Session, 2020
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reject his claim for compensation for a service-incurred disability.
Consideration 7
Extract:
If, in truth, the OPCW had been uncertain about what the Tribunal’s orders in Judgment 3854 meant or had considered they deviated from the issue requiring determination, it could have sought the Tribunal’s assistance (see, for example, Judgment 3003, consideration 31). It did not do so. The OPCW, in advancing this submission, breached its duty to execute the Tribunal’s judgment in good faith (see, for example, Judgment 3823, consideration 4). The complainant is entitled to compensation for this breach (see Judgment 2684, consideration 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2684, 3003, 3823, 3854
Keywords:
execution of judgment; good faith;
Judgment 4284
130th Session, 2020
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant asks the Tribunal to find that UNESCO has failed to execute Judgment 3936 and to order the Organization to review her case.
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that its judgments, which, according to Article VI of its Statute, are “final and without appeal” and which also have res judicata authority, are immediately operative (see, for example, Judgments 3003, under 12, and 3152, under 11). As they may not later be called into question except when an application for review is allowed, they must be executed as ruled (see, for example, Judgments 3566, under 6, and 3635, under 4). The parties must work together in good faith to execute judgments (see, for example, Judgments 2684, under 6, and 3823, under 4). Judgments must be executed within a reasonable period of time (see Judgments 2684, under aforementioned consideration 6, and 3656, under 3). In order to ascertain whether that has occurred, all the circumstances of the case must be taken into account, especially the nature and the scope of the action which the organisation is required to take (see, in particular, Judgment 3066, under 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2684, 3003, 3066, 3152, 3566, 3635, 3656, 3823
Keywords:
application for execution; execution of judgment;
Consideration 8
Extract:
[A]lthough the application for execution has become moot, the Tribunal considers it appropriate to award 7,000 euros in moral damages to the complainant, who had to wait more than 24 months for a new decision, which she received only after reminding the Organization and lodging an application for execution [...] with the Tribunal.
Keywords:
delay; execution of judgment; moral injury;
Judgment 4235
129th Session, 2020
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 4093.
Consideration 9
Extract:
It should [...] be recalled that the Tribunal’s judgments, which, under Article VI of its Statute, are “final and without appeal” and which, furthermore, have res judicata authority, are immediately operative (see, for example, Judgments 3003, consideration 12, and 3152, consideration 11). As they may not later be called into question except when an application for review is allowed, they must be executed by the parties as ruled (see, for example, Judgments 3566, consideration 6, 3635, consideration 4, and [...] 3822, consideration 9).
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VI of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3003, 3152, 3566, 3635, 3822
Keywords:
execution of judgment; res judicata;
Judgment 4093
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgment 3689.
Consideration 5
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal’s case law recognizes, as an exception to the principle recalled in consideration 3 [...], that in some cases an international organization may refrain from executing a judgment as ruled if execution proves impossible owing to subsequent facts or to pre-existing facts of which the Tribunal was unaware when it ruled on the case (see, inter alia, Judgments 3261, consideration 16, and 3824, consideration 4)[.]
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3261, 3824
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
[I]f the Organization considered that it was impossible to execute Judgment 3689 in accordance with its terms, it should have filed an application for review with the Tribunal (see Judgments 3635, consideration 8, or 3825, consideration 8). However, it did not lodge such an application in this case.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3635, 3689, 3825
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Consideration 8
Extract:
WHO is required to pay the complainant interest on arrears as ordered by the Tribunal in Judgment 3689. It should be recalled in this regard that such interest simply represents an objective form of compensation for the time that has elapsed since the date on which the principal amount was due, and that the mere fact that there was a delay in the payment of that amount is sufficient to justify payment of interest, whether or not the debtor was at fault (see, for example, Judgment 1403, consideration 8).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1403, 3689
Keywords:
delay in payment; execution of judgment; interest on arrears; interest on damages;
Consideration 9
Extract:
[I]t is not open to the Tribunal, when examining an application for execution, to modify the content of the provisions of the judgment in respect of which the application is made and it cannot therefore, in any event, determine the amount of compensation for late payment of the sums due to the complainant in a manner different to that provided for in Judgment 3689.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3689
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Judgment 4092
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant asks the Tribunal to order WHO to comply with the obligations imposed on it by Judgment 3871 and, in particular, to reinstate him with all legal consequences.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[I]t must be emphasized that WHO does not really have such freedom [to reinstate the complainant] since point 2 of the decision in Judgment 3871 requires it to reinstate the complainant “as far as possible”.
Keywords:
execution of judgment; reinstatement;
Judgment 4079
127th Session, 2019
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The UPU filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3930 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.
Consideration 22
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that an application for review does not suspend the execution of the judgment (see Judgment 1620, consideration 7).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1620
Keywords:
application for review; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; suspension of the execution of a judgment;
Consideration 24
Extract:
The delay in fully executing Judgment 3930 has caused the complainant moral injury. In awarding moral damages, the Tribunal takes into particular account the following: the duration of the delay, the fact that there was no need to seek a decision from the Council of Administration to authorize the execution of a judgment of the Tribunal, particularly when the budget was already approved for payments of awards, and the misleading presentation made by the International Bureau (in the presentation to the Council of Administration debating whether or not to execute the judgment) that the complainant’s illness was feigned. The International Bureau acted without presenting any evidence from a medical board and without having completed a disciplinary proceeding with regard to that unproven allegation, in violation of its duty of care and in breach of the adversarial principle. The UPU must respect the dignity of its staff members and preserve their reputation.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3930
Keywords:
delay in payment; duty of care; execution of judgment; moral injury; respect for dignity;
Judgment 4078
127th Session, 2019
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The UPU filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3929 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.
Consideration 22
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that an application for review does not suspend the execution of the judgment (see Judgment 1620, consideration 7).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1620
Keywords:
application for review; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; suspension of the execution of a judgment;
Consideration 24
Extract:
The delay in fully executing Judgment 3929 has caused the complainant moral injury. In awarding moral damages, the Tribunal takes into particular account the following: the duration of the delay and the fact that there was no need to seek a decision from the Council of Administration to authorize the execution of a judgment of the Tribunal, particularly when the budget was already approved for payments of awards.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3929
Keywords:
delay in payment; execution of judgment; moral injury;
Judgment 4076
127th Session, 2019
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The UPU filed and application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3927 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.
Consideration 13
Extract:
[T]he order contained in the decision of Judgment 3927 was clear and the application for review did not suspend the execution of the judgment (see Judgment 1620, consideration 7). The execution depended on the payment of an established amount of money and the UPU had to execute the judgment within one month from the date of its delivery (see Judgment 3152, consideration 20).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1620, 3152, 3927
Keywords:
application for review; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; suspension of the execution of a judgment;
Consideration 15
Extract:
The unnecessary delay in executing Judgment 3927 has caused the complainant moral injury, for which she is entitled to moral damages that the Tribunal sets in the amount of 1,000 Swiss francs.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3927
Keywords:
delay in payment; execution of judgment; moral injury;
Judgment 3989
126th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The EPO has filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 3972.
Consideration 5
Extract:
Both the EPO and the complainant must approach the implementation of the orders in a rational, sensible and balanced way and, as a paramount consideration, do so lawfully (see, for example, Judgment 3823, under 4).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3823
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
Judgment 3986
126th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant has filed an application for execution of Judgment 3887.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The parties must work together in good faith to execute the judgment (see Judgment 3823, under 4).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3823
Keywords:
execution of judgment; good faith;
Judgment 3895
125th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3694.
Consideration 4
Extract:
With regard to the clarification requested under a) [...], the expression an “Appeals Committee, composed in accordance with the applicable rules”, in the present case refers to the procedural rules in force at the time of the execution of the judgment (i.e. the new examination of the appeal). It must be accepted that the procedural rules governing the composition of the Appeals Committee could be changed and that, in the event of a change, the new provisions should apply to the complainant’s appeal. In saying this the Tribunal is not expressing a view about the lawfulness of the new provisions. As the application for execution is only based on the arguments raised with respect to the application for interpretation, it is without merit.
Keywords:
applicable law; execution of judgment;
Judgment 3826
124th Session, 2017
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant has filed an application for execution of Judgment 3593.
Consideration 5
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law, at the stage of execution of a judgment by the parties, and likewise in the context of an application for execution, the judgment has res judicata authority and must be executed as ruled (see Judgment 3332, consideration 4). As a corollary of the res judicata authority, the Tribunal’s judgments are immediately operative, and, for this reason, an international organization is bound to take whatever action a judgment may require (see Judgment 3152, consideration 11). As to the time within which a judgment is to be executed, the following was stated in Judgment 1812, consideration 4 [...].
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1812, 3152, 3332
Keywords:
execution of judgment;
1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
