Judgment 1160
72nd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
"Further claims [from one of the complainants] to a ruling on the Organization's alleged failure to deal with the issues in his statements of appeal and to 'directions' to the administration 'in the interest of justice' do not constitute proper forms of relief and therefore will not be entertained."
Keywords:
claim; compensation; failure to answer claim; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1115
71st Session, 1991
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Appeal Board, which had new evidence before it, agreed to reopen the internal proceedings. It then reported that it was unable to make a further recommendation. The Director General took no further express decision. But that "does not preclude the complainant from impugning the implied decision that followed the resumption of hearings by the Board on the strength of new evidence. The outcome of the resumed hearings must be subject to review by the Tribunal even though the implied decision is the same in purport as the original decision."
Keywords:
case reopened; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeals body; new time limit; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1096
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"A complaint is receivable under Article VII(3) where the administration fails to take any decision upon the claim within sixty days of the date of notification of it. Once an organisation has accepted the Tribunal's Statute it may not derogate from Article VII(3) by dint of internal rules of its own. The only difference Eurocontrol's own Staff Regulations may make is that it is estopped from objecting to receivability when, in reliance on its own time limit, a staff member has filed a complaint that would be receivable under its Staff Regulations but out of time under Article VII." (See also Judgment 1095.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1095
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; difference; failure to answer claim; good faith; iloat statute; precedence of rules; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 12
Extract:
"Since the complaints have met the requirements of [article] VII [of the Tribunal's Statute] and the time limits therein the plea of irreceivability fails. The organisation's belated decisions expressly rejecting the appeals do not alter the substance of the dispute, which turns on the rejection to be inferred from expiry of the time limit in [Article]VII(3)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; express decision; failure to answer claim; implied decision; late decision; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1095
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
"A complaint is receivable under Article VII(3) where the administration fails to take any decision upon the claim within sixty days of the date of notification of it. Once an organisation has accepted the Tribunal's Statute it may not derogate from Article VII(3) by dint of internal rules of its own. The only difference Eurocontrol's own Staff Regulations may make is that it is estopped from objecting to receivability when, in reliance on its own time limit, a staff member has filed a complaint that would be receivable under its Staff Regulations but out of time under Article VII."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; difference; failure to answer claim; good faith; iloat statute; precedence of rules; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 941
65th Session, 1988
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
The organisation maintains that the complaint was time-barred as it was not filed within ninety days of the implied decision to reject it arising out of the administration's silence. The Tribunal holds that "the organisation may not plead its own failure to act. The complainant had good reason to infer [and had done his utmost to ensure] that his claim was still under review."
Keywords:
complaint; failure to answer claim; good faith; implied decision; internal appeal; negligence; organisation; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 931
65th Session, 1988
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant contends that he was entitled to costs inasmuch as he was granted satisfaction pendente lite and because his complaint was receivable at the date of filing. The Tribunal holding that his appeal was premature and therefore irreceivable, his claim for costs fails.
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case pending; costs; failure to answer claim; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; settlement out of court; time limit;
Judgment 905
64th Session, 1988
Intergovernmental Council of Copper Exporting Countries
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Under Article VII[1] of the Tribunal's Statute a complaint will not be receivable unless it challenges a final decision or, under VII[3], an implied one. Since the organisation did not take an express final decision within 60 days of the date on which the complainant notified his claim by letter of 4 June 1987, his claim is receivable under VII[3] in the same manner as one challenging an express final decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
Organization rules reference: ARTICLES 3.2.1 AND 5.3 OF THE CIPEC STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 887
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
"Appeal will lie either against an express decision, described as an 'act adversely affecting' the official, or against rejection inferred from failure to answer a claim. In the latter case, where the decision is implied, the prerequisite is the lodging by the official of a formal appeal with the administration."
Keywords:
complaint; condition; decision; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 852
63rd Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Faced with the administration's failure to take action on the basis of the Appeals Committee's report, the complainant filed a complaint within the three-month time limit set by Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal. The final decision was later taken, after the expiry of the time limits in the Service Regulations. It follows that the organisation's objections to receivability must be dismissed. The proceedings shall resume on the merits.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case pending; case sent back to organisation; decision; failure to answer claim; further submissions on the merits; late decision; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; reply confined to receivability; tribunal;
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 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 697
57th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The Tribunal will hold the internal means of redress to have been exhausted if the complainant has pursued them with all diligence but without being able within a reasonable period of time to obtain a result. In this case, for the Tribunal to entertain the complaint, the complainant would have to satisfy it that there was no objective prospect of the internal process being concluded within a reasonable time. He has not done so.
Keywords:
failure to answer claim; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 588
51st Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Because the rule that the internal means of redress must be exhausted, the complainant incurs the risk of a time bar if no definite time limits are set for filing the internal appeal. But where a complainant, in strict observance of the time limits, has done his utmost to secure a decision and the appeals body has nevertheless failed to report, it is only just to allow an exception to the rule."
Keywords:
exception; failure to answer claim; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
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;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Before coming to the Tribunal again the complainant should await the Appeals Committee's report and the President's final decision. But he need not wait indefinitely. He may appeal directly to the Tribunal if one of two conditions is fulfilled: if the appeals body fails to report and there are grounds for believing that it will not do so within a reasonable lapse of time; or else if the President fails to take a final decision within sixty days of receiving the Appeals Body's report."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; failure to answer claim; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time;
Judgment 532
49th Session, 1982
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
Vide Judgment 533, consideration 5.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 533
Keywords:
absence of final decision; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; failure to answer claim; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time;
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;
Considerations
Extract:
"The time limit for filing a complaint is ninety days, either after the notification of the express decision or from the expiry of the sixty-day time limit allowed for the taking of a decision by the organisation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; failure to answer claim; further submissions on the merits; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 489
48th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Under the Rules a claim is deemed to have been rejected if no definitive reply has been made within three months. The request for reclassification was submitted on 29 November 1979; three months later, on 1 March 1980, having received no reply, the complainant's request must be deemed to have been rejected. The complainant waited until 16 July 1980 to appeal to the internal appeals body. In the meantime, on 25 March and 19 June, he had been informed that the matter was being studied. The Director-General was correct in deciding that the internal appeal was irreceivable: there had been no final decision expressing rejection. The complaint is dismissed.
Keywords:
absence of final decision; failure to answer claim; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 458
46th Session, 1981
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3-4
Extract:
The complainant sought the Director-General's approval, required under the material provisions, for him to to appeal directly to the Tribunal. Having received no reply within the time limit he had given, the complainant considered that the organization's silence was to be taken as consent. But the Director-General was not bound to answer the complainant by the deadline he had arbitrarily set. Furthermore, he did not ask for the Director-General's agreement until after the expiry of the time limit for addressing an appeal: he should therefore have expected a refusal. The complaint is clearly irreceivable.
Keywords:
acceptance; direct appeal to tribunal; executive head; failure to answer claim; provision; request by a party; staff regulations and rules; time limit;
Judgment 456
46th Session, 1981
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The purpose of Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal is two-fold: a) to enable an official to defend his interests by going to the Tribunal when the administration has failed to take a decision; b) to prevent a dispute from dragging on indefinitely and from coming before the Tribunal at a time when the material facts have altered or can no longer be determined with certainty.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; provision; purpose;
