Delay (111,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Delay
Total judgments found: 155
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
Judgment 1970
89th Session, 2000
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"A complainant cannot sit back and do nothing when an appeal is lodged. He must pursue the appeal diligently. Only then can he claim that delay is unreasonable. In the present case, the complainant failed to exhaust the means of internal appeal because he did not pursue his appeal diligently; therefore, he does not qualify to bring a direct appeal to the Tribunal."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complaint; delay; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; time limit;
Judgment 1968
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Receivability falls to be determined at the time that a complaint is filed, not at some later date. As at 29 July 1999 the complainant had done all that could be reasonably expected of him. He had filed his appeal in time. Approximately a year later he wrote to enquire about its progress and had been informed that the administration had done nothing but would move forward as soon as possible. He filed his complaint just over four months later having heard nothing further from the administration. At that time almost twenty months had elapsed since the original challenged decision had been published. The administration's plea that it had a heavy backlog of internal appeals to deal with may be a reason for the inordinate delay, but it is not an excuse. As at 29 July 1999, it was simply not reasonable to expect the complainant to wait any longer to see even the beginning of the end of the internal appeal procedure. If the organisation was overloaded with internal appeals, it was for it to remedy the situation rather than expect the complainant to bear the consequences."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; complaint; delay; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1892
88th Session, 2000
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The claims relating to the failure to execute the judgment sending the case back to the organisation for a new ruling on his appeal [...] must be disallowed because the [...] procedure necessitated by the judgment quashing the original decision was [...] implemented swiftly." [After a new recommendation by the Joint Committee for Disputes, the Director General rejected the complainant's new internal appeal three and a half months after the Tribunal's judgment that was then made the subject of an application for execution.]
Keywords:
application for execution; case sent back to organisation; decision; decision quashed; delay; execution of judgment; internal appeal; judgment of the tribunal; remand; time limit;
Judgment 1812
86th Session, 1999
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"There is no single time limit for executing judgments. The Tribunal's practice is to let the organisation have a reasonable amount of time to act, and what is reasonable will depend, among other things, on the circumstances and the issues at stake. To be sure, the Tribunal has said more than once that any lump-sum award by the Tribunal is to be paid in 30 days [see Judgments 1620 and 1748]. That deadline holds good when the organisation may readily work out the amount due. But it does not when a case is sent back for a new decision: the time to be allowed will then turn on the peculiarities of the case."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1620, 1748
Keywords:
application for execution; case law; case sent back to organisation; delay; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; practice; time limit; tribunal;
Judgment 1736
85th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Of course the first report should have been done earlier and the complainant is right enough to cite Rule 540.1. but [...] he was himself largely to blame for the delay, not having filled up the report form until [a given date]. Besides, his second- level supervisor had told him orally, before putting it in the report, that he was not cooperative enough. It is plain on the evidence that he knew full well that his performance had been found wanting; so he may not properly argue that he was told too late to be able to improve."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: STAFF RULE 540.1
Keywords:
complainant; date; delay; duty to inform; liability; performance report; period; staff regulations and rules; work appraisal;
Judgment 1549
81st Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"Although an organisation [may consider] late applicants, it must, whenever a competition is required or desired, announce a new deadline in the same way as it did the vacancy. It will then commit no breach of equality and the competition will be seen as fair."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; delay; due process; equal treatment; internal candidate; new time limit; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; selection procedure; time limit; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1534
81st Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The FAO submits that his complaint is irreceivable because he has failed to exhaust his internal remedies. Though he filed before he got the final decision [...] the Committee took a whole year to come up with a three-page report and the Director-General another five months to let the complainant have a decision. Such delays are exorbitant and unpardonable. Under the circumstances the complainant was entitled to come straight to the Tribunal without waiting any longer for a reply from the Director-General. The objections to receivability fail."
Keywords:
administrative delay; complaint; date of notification; delay; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1502
81st Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Organization's "own interests and sound management demand strict compliance with time limits, and non-compliance means forfeiting a right or the exercise thereof: see Judgment 1446 [...] under 3, the further judgments cited therein and Judgment 1485 [...]. A time limit is not to be waived just because claims are seldom late or because the consequences of refusing waiver would be too harsh."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1466, 1485
Keywords:
case law; delay; exception; interpretation; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Time limits must be construed in good faith. If an organisation wants to put procedural restrictions on one of the staff member's rights or on the exercise thereof it must draft clearly enough to avoid setting traps."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1376
Keywords:
case law; delay; good faith; interpretation; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 1469
80th Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"To satisfy the requirement in Article VII(1) the complainant must not only follow the prescribed internal procedure for appeal, but follow it properly and in particular observe any time limit that may be set for the purpose for internal procedures."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; delay; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1439
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The organization refused to promote the complainant with effect from the date at which he met the material conditions on the grounds that he had been subject to disciplinary action. The Tribunal quashed the disciplinary action in an earlier judgment and the complainant finally got his promotion, albeit with some delay. The Tribunal rejects his claim to moral damages. "The delay in granting him promotion caused him no moral injury because the organisation acted in good faith in originally deciding not to promote him."
Keywords:
date; delay; disciplinary measure; effective date; good faith; judgment of the tribunal; moral injury; organisation; promotion; refusal;
Judgment 1413
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[The complainant's] claim to a higher grade is irreceivable. Even if her career did suffer delay she may not seek redress on that account in the context of the choice of career path; nor may she impugn any decision that she failed to challenge in time or object to her grading as administrative assistant."
Keywords:
assignment; career; complaint; delay; post classification; promotion; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1412
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant may not, "in the context of a challenge to the choice of career path, object to earlier delays which he believes held up his advancement. Nor has he any grounds for saying that putting him on path V may 'discourage' him: CERN's evident purpose in making such ambitious reforms is to act in the general interest and try to ensure equal treatment for all its staff."
Keywords:
assignment; career; delay; equal treatment; organisation's interest; procedure before the tribunal; promotion; staff member's interest;
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;
Consideration 9
Extract:
In view of the exceptional circumstances in the country where the Appeals Board was to meet - political upheaval and riots - "the delay in the Board's handling of [the] appeal was not wholly due to any shortcomings of its own and in any event did not warrant direct referral to the Headquarters Board."
Keywords:
delay; exception; internal appeals body; report;
Judgment 1403
78th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
Having placed a liberal construction on the applicable rule, Eurocontrol granted certain clerical officers payment of the so-called typist's allowance. This established a practice which remains in force until such time as a decision is taken to amend or abolish it. "Payment of the allowance to the complainant was a matter, not of discretion, but of obligation, and Eurocontrol's delay in discharging it entitles her to interest."
Keywords:
binding character; delay; interest on damages; organisation's duties; practice; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1394
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant claims damages for injury due to wrongful delay in completing his performance report for 1986-87. "The Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence that the delay that occurred was inadmissible. The EPO's failure to settle reasonably soon a dispute that raised no especially difficult issue of fact or law has discomfited the complainant in that after six years he does not yet have his final rating for 1986-87. [...] He has sustained moral injury, and indeed it is expressly acknowledged in later staff reports. On that score he will get fair redress in an award of 5,000 German marks in damages."
Keywords:
compensation; delay; moral injury; organisation's duties; performance report; work appraisal;
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;
Judgment 1362
77th Session, 1994
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal must rule yet again on WIPO's refusal to discharge the obligation to decide on reinstatement. As it has stated more than once, its judgments are to be given immediate effect. In the regrettable event that the Organization continues to disregard that rule and fails to act within 30 days of the date of delivery of this judgment, it must pay the complainant 10,000 swiss francs by way of penalty for each further month of delay."
Keywords:
amount; application for execution; continuing breach; decision; delay; execution of judgment; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; penalty for delay; refusal; reinstatement; res judicata; time limit;
Judgment 1338
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 11-12
Extract:
"An organisation must, where a specific sum has been awarded [by the Tribunal], pay compensation if it takes more than one month to pay after the judgment was notified, save that if, as in Judgment 1219, the Tribunal does not put a figure on the amount due, the need to work out the figure warrants allowing additional time. In this instance [...] apart from alleging the need for consultations the Organization has offered no explanation for the delay in payment. The Tribunal therefore awards the complainant payment of interest".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1219
Keywords:
administrative delay; amount; application for execution; delay; execution of judgment; formal demand for payment; interest on damages; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; payment; penalty for delay; res judicata; time limit;
Judgment 1331
76th Session, 1994
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"On account of the undue delay in the selection process [i.e. some ten months between the issue of the vacancy notice and the meeting of the Selection Committee] the Tribunal awards the complainant damages for moral injury in a sum of 1,000 United States dollars."
Keywords:
administrative delay; competition; competition cancelled; delay; due process; moral injury; procedure before the tribunal; selection board; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1246
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 14-15
Extract:
"The purpose of Article 6.7.3 of the Staff Regulations is that the lapse of time between first and second reports should be long enough - the period prescribed is nine months - to give the probationer a proper opportunity of showing his mettle before the second report has to be made. The period of less than three months that the complainant was allowed was far too short to allow of any substantial improvement. [...] The procedural flaw caused the complainant injury."
Keywords:
cause of action; date; delay; due process; flaw; performance report; probationary period; procedural flaw; qualifications; staff regulations and rules;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
|
