Surrejoinder (173, 160, 161, 162, 164, 165, 174, 793,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Surrejoinder
Total judgments found: 11

• Judgment 4564

  
  134th Session, 2022
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges his staff report for the 2008-2009 exercise.

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  [T]he complainant complains, [...] in respect of the documents appended to the surrejoinder, that the Organisation produced them at a stage in the proceedings when it was no longer possible for him to respond to them. However, while it is certainly regrettable that the Organisation acted in this manner when it would clearly have been possible for it to submit those documents when it filed its reply, the adversarial nature of the proceedings before the Tribunal was nonetheless respected, since the complainant was specifically authorised to present additional submissions in order to be able to make his observations thereon.

  Keywords:

  adversarial proceedings; further material; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4474

  
  133rd Session, 2022
  International Criminal Court
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant filed an application to review Judgment 4360.

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  The fresh evidence adduced in the surrejoinder was [...] deployed by the Tribunal to assess and decide what relief was appropriate. Necessarily that decision must be made by reference to facts and circumstances known at the time of the assessment, which may include facts and circumstances that were not known when the decision to dismiss was made. Very commonly this would entail an assessment, in a case of unlawful dismissal, whether an order of reinstatement was appropriate. That, in turn, often raises for consideration the passage of time between the dismissal and when a remedy is being considered, including the possible prejudice to the organisation if reinstatement were ordered. While this case was extremely unusual if not extraordinary, it simply cannot be suggested that the fresh evidence in this case was not relevant to remedy. It was and that was the use made of it by the Tribunal.

  Keywords:

  effective date; evidence; reinstatement; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4384

  
  131st Session, 2021
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to reclassify his post.

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  With regard to the complainant’s request to disregard some of the paragraphs contained in the surrejoinder, the Tribunal accedes. Those paragraphs do not refute any arguments presented in the complaint or rejoinder and were inappropriate, and thus the Tribunal hereby disregards them.

  Keywords:

  surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3695

  
  122nd Session, 2016
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant impugns the EPO’s rejection of his two internal appeals against the Ombudsman’s failure to follow the formal procedure in respect of his harassment complaint and against the President’s decision to reject that harassment complaint.

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  It is open to the Tribunal to treat the express decision as replacing the implied decision (see for example Judgment 3184, consideration 3), on the basis that the belated express decision is the decision the Tribunal should consider (see Judgment 3161, considerations 1 and 2). However, if the express decision is only provided by the defendant organization in its surrejoinder (as happened in this case) then the Tribunal needs to ensure that the complainant has an opportunity to comment on that decision in appropriate cases to ensure that the complainant is afforded procedural fairness.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3161, 3184
  

  Keywords:

  express decision; final decision; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3648

  
  122nd Session, 2016
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the validity of a competition process in which she participated and the lawfulness of the ensuing appointment.

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  [I]t is worth recalling that an organisation may not raise a new objection to receivability in its surrejoinder, that is to say at a stage of the proceedings when the other party is, in principle, no longer able to respond, where the objection could have been raised in its reply, as is the case for an objection based on the absence of a cause of action (see, in particular, Judgments 1082, under 16, 1419, under 20, and 3422, under 14, in fine). The fact that in this case the complainant was allowed by the Tribunal to file additional submissions enabling her to respond to the new argument raised by WIPO in its surrejoinder does not alter the fact that this manner of proceeding is not acceptable.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1082, 1419, 3422
  

  Keywords:

  surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3647

  
  122nd Session, 2016
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the validity of a competition process in which he participated and the lawfulness of the ensuing appointment.

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  [T]he principle of good faith, from which flow the requirement of mutual trust between an organisation and its staff and the requirement of fairness in appeals proceedings, in any case dictates that such an objection may not properly be raised at this stage of proceedings [in a surrejoinder].

  Keywords:

  good faith; surrejoinder;
  

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  [I]t is worth recalling that an organisation may not raise a new objection to receivability in its surrejoinder, that is to say at a stage of proceedings when the other party is, in principle, no longer able to respond, where the objection in question could have been raised in the reply, as is the case for an objection such as this, based on the absence of a cause of action (see, in particular, Judgments 1082, under 16, 1419, under 20, and 3422, under 14, in fine).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1082, 1419, 3422
  

  Keywords:

  surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3525

  
  120th Session, 2015
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges statements made by the EPO in its surrejoinder to his second complaint which led to Judgment 3146.

  Judgment keywords

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3146
  

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; joinder; procedure before the tribunal; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3422

  
  119th Session, 2015
  Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The Tribunal found that the Global Fund breached its duty of care towards the complainant and that his separation entitlements were not sufficient.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; surrejoinder;
  

  Consideration 14

  Extract:

  In its surrejoinder, the Global Fund raises a plea that his claim for underpayment should have been, but was not, raised in the internal appeal. However, this plea should have been raised by the Global Fund in its reply. It was not and is not a plea to which the complainant has had an opportunity to respond. Accordingly, it is disregarded.

  Keywords:

  new plea; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1420

  
  78th Session, 1995
  European Southern Observatory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  See Judgment 1419, consideration 20.

  Keywords:

  complaint; new plea; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1419

  
  78th Session, 1995
  European Southern Observatory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 20

  Extract:

  "It is inadmissible for the Observatory in its surrejoinder - to which it knows the complainants do not have the opportunity of answering - to raise a new objection to receivability on the strength of facts it was aware of at the time of filing. The plea is the less acceptable for being at odds with the ESO's reply."

  Keywords:

  complaint; new plea; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply; surrejoinder;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1082

  
  70th Session, 1991
  Intergovernmental Council of Copper Exporting Countries
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 16

  Extract:

  "It is in bad faith to enter a new objection [to receivability] in the surrejoinder when the complainant may not reply."

  Keywords:

  good faith; new plea; surrejoinder;