ILOAT Statute (223,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: ILOAT Statute
Total judgments found: 191
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
Judgment 1260
75th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant wants the Tribunal to order the removal of a mention in his file after he turned down the offer of a post which allegedly puts an "obstacle" on his name to get jobs from the organization. The organization contends that it has not had any contractual ties with the complainant since a short contract it gave him some time ago, and it points out that his present claims have no bearing on that contract. "The Tribunal's competence is restricted under Article II(5) of its Statute to hearing complaints alleging the non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of an official or of provisions of the organisation's Staff Regulations. The complaint fails because the Tribunal lacks competence to entertain it."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II(5) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complaint; contract; iloat statute; locus standi; non official; personal file; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1258
75th Session, 1993
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
EMBL submits that only if the complainant withdraws a suit she filed with a national court will her complaint be receivable and that only the withdrawal of that suit will show that she acknowledges the Tribunal's competence. "The Tribunal is competent to entertain her claims under paragraphs 5 and 6 of Article II of its Statute; she has observed the time limits; and her complaint is receivable. It is for the [national] labour court [...] to rule on its own competence."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II(5) AND (6) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complaint; iloat statute; municipal court; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1257
75th Session, 1993
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1258, consideration 4.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II(5) AND (6) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complaint; iloat statute; municipal court; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1256
75th Session, 1993
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant asked the Director-General to review his decision to reject his application for a vacant post after the expiry of the one month delay for filing of an internal appeal. He wants the Tribunal to acknowledge the exceptional character of his case as justifying an extension of the normally applicable time limit. "According to precedent a complainant may not be deemed to have exhausted the means of redress at his disposal within the organisation unless he has followed the prescribed internal procedure for appeal and in particular observed the time limits. So if his internal appeal was out of time his complaint to this Tribunal will also be irreceivable under Article VII(1)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Organization rules reference: UPU STAFF RULE 111.3
Keywords:
case law; complaint; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 6
Extract:
To escape the time bar the complainant relies on UPU Staff Rule 111.3.4, which allows the Joint Appeals Committee to waive the time limit in exceptional circumstances. "As the Union observes, the time limit which the Committee may waive is not the one in 111.3.1 - the one month for submitting a request for review to the Director-General - but only the one for appeal to the Committee against the decision rejecting such request." The complaint is therefore irreceivable.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UPU STAFF RULE 111.3
Keywords:
case law; complaint; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1255
75th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Judgments are 'final and without appeal' according to Article VI of the Statute of the Tribunal and they carry the authority of res judicata. The Tribunal will therefore entertain an application for review only in quite exceptional circumstances. As it has stated many times, and in detail in Judgment 442 [...], the admissible grounds for review of a judgment are strictly limited: they are failure to take account of some material fact, a mistaken finding of fact that involves no exercise of judgment, omission to rule on a claim and the discovery of some new essential fact which the complainant was unable to rely on in the original proceedings. Moreover, the applicant's plea must be such as to affect the original ruling."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VI OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 442
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; iloat statute; res judicata;
Judgment 1247
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant's termination has not been justified on the grounds of serious misconduct. "Reinstatement is no longer possible. The Tribunal therefore awards him, in accordance with Article VIII of its Statute, compensation in a sum of 600 dollars, the full amount of remuneration due for the rest of his contract."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
compensation; contract; grounds; iloat statute; reinstatement; salary; serious misconduct; termination of employment; tribunal;
Judgment 1246
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The procedural flaw caused the complainant injury. As to the relief she is entitled to on that account, the Tribunal holds that it is not advisable to grant her the redress that would ordinarily be the consequence of quashing the impugned decision, namely reinstatement. The Tribunal therefore exercises the discretion vested in it by Article VIII of its Statute and instead awards the complainant damages for the breach of procedure. It sets the amount at the equivalent of one year's salary and allowances."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
allowance; compensation; decision; due process; flaw; iloat statute; material damages; procedural flaw; reinstatement; right; salary; tribunal;
Judgment 1244
74th Session, 1993
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The meaning of Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute is, according to the case law, "that a complainant must not only have gone through any internal appeals procedure within his organisation but duly complied with the requirements of the rules on that procedure. Thus, if the internal appeal was irreceivable under those rules, the complaint to the Tribunal will also be irreceivable under Article VII(1)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case law; complaint; due process; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;
Judgment 1236
74th Session, 1993
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The letter [...] from the head of administration was plainly CERN's answer to his internal appeal [...]. On the issue of notice it is therefore a final decision and meets the requirements for receivability in Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; condition; decision; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1230
74th Session, 1993
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The rule is that for his complaint to be receivable the staff member must not only meet the time limit in Article VII(2) of [the Tribunal's] Statute but have properly followed the internal appeal procedure."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
condition; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time limit;
Judgment 1227
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant is challenging a report submitted by the Joint Appeals Board. "The report [...] plainly does not constitute a final decision within the meaning of the UNIDO Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. The complaint is therefore irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; report;
Judgment 1213
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant is claiming assignment to a specific post. The meaning of Article VIII of the Tribunal's Statute, "as the case law has construed it, is that the Tribunal may not order an organisation to put a staff member on any particular post. All it may do is set aside an unlawful decision putting someone on a post or refusing to do so or order specific performance where the organisation has failed to discharge an obligation. In this case [...] the complainant's claim [...] fails because it is irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
assignment; case law; claim; competence of tribunal; iloat statute; interpretation; organisation's duties; post; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1209
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has often said - for example in Judgments 442 [...] and 1178 [...] - neither its Statute nor the Rules of Court provide for review of its rulings. Although it will nevertheless entertain an application for review, only on exceptional grounds will it do so because it will thereby be derogating from the res judicata rule. Some pleas in favour of review are admissible and some are not."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 442, 1178
Keywords:
application for review; case law; iloat statute; res judicata;
Judgment 1205
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The complaint is irreceivable because the decision impugned is not a final one: the complainant has failed to exhaust the internal means of redress, in breach of the requirement in Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; decision; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1181
73rd Session, 1992
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complaint raises a question of receivability. Under Article 43 (1) of the Staff Regulations an internal appeal must be lodged within thirty days of the date on which a decision was notified. The complainant pleads that he made a material mistake by reading the thirty days as one calendar month. "Time limits for internal appeals must be strictly complied with. The complainant failed to abide by the Staff Regulations, and the mistake he supposedly made is irrelevant because the organization did not seek to mislead him. Since he has not exhausted the internal means of redress, his complaint is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 43 OF THE INTERPOL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
date of notification; delay; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; mandatory time limit; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1172
73rd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The conclusion is that in substance [the complainant's] letter [...] amounted to a request for further information and explanation on a matter the parties had been discussing for years. If his intention was to lodge an appeal under Chapter VI of the Staff Rules he ought to have used language more in keeping with that of an appeal. In any event, on receiving CERN's reply [...] he ought to have applied for referral to the Appeals Board, which [...] is not just a formality. Had he applied for such referral the ambiguous wording of his letter might have been treated as just an oversight, and had the organization turned down his claims it might have been held that he had exhausted the internal means of redress as Article VII(1) the Tribunal's Statute required him to do."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Organization rules reference: CHAPTER VI OF THE CERN STAFF RULES
Keywords:
condition; formal requirements; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reply; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1149
72nd Session, 1992
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"According to the case law, the scope of claims to the Tribunal may not go beyond that of the claims that formed part of the internal appeal, since any claim that goes further is barred under the rule in Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute that the complainant must have exhausted the internal means of redress."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case law; claim; iloat statute; internal remedies exhausted; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1115
71st Session, 1991
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
As the complaint was filed on the ninetieth day after the date of notification of the impugned decision, it is receivable in keeping with Article 6, paragraph 3, of the Rules of court and Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 6(3) OF THE RULES
Keywords:
date of notification; decision; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 1106
71st Session, 1991
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to Article VII(2) of the Tribunal's Statute a complaint will not be receivable unless filed within ninety days of the date of notification of the impugned decision, and Article 6(3) of the Rules of Court says that the 'date of despatch' of the complaint shall alone be taken into account." The complainant got notification of the impugned decision on 7 March 1990. Having waited until 6 June 1990 to post his complaint, he ran over the time limit by one day: the complaint is time-barred.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 6(3) OF THE RULES
Keywords:
date of notification; decision; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1105
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant is objecting to a decision based on a statement allegedly made by the Director-General about the circumstances of his departure from UNESCO. The Tribunal is competent ratione personae: under Article II(6) of its Statute it is open to former officials of UNESCO." But it is not competent ratione materiae under II(5) inasmuch as he is not alleging non-observance of the terms of his appointment or provisions of the Staff Regulations. "He must show not just some connection with the terms of his appointment but also 'non-observance' of them."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II(5) AND (6) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; condition; contract; iloat statute; separation from service;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
|
