Time bar (117,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Time bar
Total judgments found: 219
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
Judgment 395
43rd Session, 1980
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The two decisions of 1974 at issue "were not impugned before the Tribunal within the time limit. They had therefore become final when the complainant challenged them in [...] 1978 and remained in full legal force as long as they were neither amended by the Director-General himself nor invalidated by special circumstances of time or of place."
Keywords:
complaint; decision; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 390
43rd Session, 1980
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The letter was delivered by hand at the complainant's residence, and the complainant does not deny that the letter was accepted at his residence nor offer any explanation as to what could thereafter have happened to it. "The complainant admittedly received this letter; he did not reply to it denying receipt of the memorandum. In these circumstances the Tribunal finds that the complainant was notified of the decision on 13 January and that consequently the complaint was not filed in time."
Keywords:
complaint; date of notification; decision; evidence; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 364
41st Session, 1978
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
Under Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal, "a complaint shall not be receivable unless the person concerned has exhausted such other means of resisting it as are open to him in the applicable staff regulations. This means that where, as here, the Staff Regulations provide for an appeal committee, the person concerned must bring his complaint before that body within the time limits allowed by the regulation. Thus the question for the tribunal is whether the Appeals Board was right in rejecting the complaint on the ground that it was not brought before it in due time."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 349
40th Session, 1978
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 31
Extract:
"Under [the applicable provision] the complainant should have made his claim within six months from the date the injury originated or at latest within six months of the date when its serious consequences became manifest, and this he has failed to do. It is not enough to report the occurrence, as the complainant claims he did to a direct superior or to the organisation's male nurse or medical doctor; there must be a claim for compensation."
Keywords:
invalidity; professional accident; receivability of the complaint; service-incurred; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 347
40th Session, 1978
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant was promoted but granted no seniority at his new step. He failed to impugn that decision in time. Claiming that he had been less fairly treated than officials promoted in the meantime, the complainant submitted a further request to the Director-General, which was dismissed. Although the effect of that decision is the same as that of the first decision, it is an answer to the claim made by the complainant. "Since it is not merely confirmatory, it may be impugned before the Tribunal."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; internal appeal; promotion; receivability of the complaint; seniority; time bar;
Judgment 338
40th Session, 1978
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Assuming that the appeals filed by the complainant were receivable, the complainant "should in any event have appealed to the [appeals body] not later than thirty days after [the confirmation of the decision]. He did not appeal to the [appeals body] until [...] after the time limit had expired. The Director-General was therefore right to dismiss the appeal."
Keywords:
internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 322
39th Session, 1977
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is immaterial that according to [the relevant provision] an official may not waive his right to remuneration. [...] It is through his own delay that he may lose his right to family allowance, and not because of any express or implied waiver on his part."
Keywords:
dependent child; family allowance; reasonable time; request by a party; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 305
38th Session, 1977
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"[T]hat further decision was a refusal to reconsider [the earlier decision] and is therefore a mere confirmation: it cannot give rise to a new ninety-day period when the first was allowed to lapse."
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 298
38th Session, 1977
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[E]ven if recourse to a national court, which does not have jurisdiction, might be regarded as postponing the time limit for appeal to the Tribunal, which does have jurisdiction, such an appeal may properly be lodged in accordance with the Tribunal's Statute only within ninety days after notification of the national court's decision that it is not competent [...]." [In the instant case that time limit was not observed.]
Keywords:
complaint; municipal court; new time limit; start of time limit; time bar;
Judgment 292
38th Session, 1977
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complaint seeks the refund of education expenses. "On [the first day of every month] the organisation, if the complainant is right, acted adversely towards him by failing to adopt the measure prescribed [...]. However, the time limit of three months, running backwards from the [date of] application [...] means that claims in respect of [earlier] payments are time-barred."
Keywords:
allowance; continuing breach; education expenses; injury; payment; receivability of the complaint; refund; time bar;
Judgment 277
37th Session, 1976
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The organisation maintains that the internal appeal was time-barred and therefore irreceivable. "According to Article VII, paragraph 1, of its Statute [the Tribunal] is required to consider merely whether the internal means of redress have been exhausted - in this case whether the Director-General's" original decision led to a recommendation by the Appeals Committee. That condition is undoubtedly fulfilled, and the complaint is therefore receivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; time bar;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"It is immaterial that the Appeals Committee may have erred in hearing the appeal. The fact is that it gave its views and consequently the complainant had recourse to the internal means of redress available to him."
Keywords:
consequence; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 275
36th Session, 1976
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"It is not necessary to consider whether the internal time limit was respected since the Appeals Committee decided on the merits."
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal appeals body; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 261
35th Session, 1975
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The complaint does not relate to any non-observance by the organization of the complainant's terms of appointment and consequently this claim falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. It is therefore unnecessary to consider whether or not it is time-barred."
Keywords:
breach; cause of action; claim; competence of tribunal; complaint; consequence; no cause of action; organisation; receivability of the complaint; terms of appointment; time bar;
Judgment 259
35th Session, 1975
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The decision in question, which merely upheld an earlier decision, could "not give rise to new time limits for the lodging of an appeal by the complainant."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; decision; internal appeal; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Considerations
Extract:
Under the applicable provision, the complainant had a period of six weeks in which to appeal against the decision which he regarded as detrimental. "No appeal having been lodged within that period, the decision had [...] become final [...] when the complainant asked for review of his case. The Secretary-General and subsequently the Appeal Board therefore acted lawfully in dismissing the request on that ground." No exceptional circumstances warranted a derogation from the prescribed time limits.
Keywords:
decision; internal appeal; mandatory time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 258
35th Session, 1975
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complaint was filed "clearly after the expiry of the time limit set by Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal. It is declared irreceivable in accordance with Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Rules of court, notwithstanding the absence of any reply by the organization on the merits."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 8, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE RULES
Keywords:
complaint; receivability of the complaint; summary procedure; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 249
34th Session, 1975
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant "did not appeal to the Tribunal against either decision within the statutory time limits. The decisions have therefore become final and are no longer open to appeal unless the Secretary-General exercises his power to reopen the case."
Keywords:
case reopened; decision; exception; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 244
33rd Session, 1974
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"[T]he complainant did not object to the terms of [his appointments, which gave him local status,] at any time before or during their period of validity. It was only after the appointments had expired that he maintained that Geneva could not lawfully be stated to be his home. It was therefore no longer open to him to contest the terms of appointment, which had become final."
Keywords:
contract; decision; local status; non-local status; receivability of the complaint; residence; terms of appointment; time bar;
Judgment 236
32nd Session, 1974
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The publication of a list of officials does not confirm the decision to transfer the complainant [against which appeal is time-barred] and does not constitute a new decision. The complaint is irreceivable.
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; receivability of the complaint; time bar; transfer;
Considerations 3-4
Extract:
The complaint was filed on 30 March. To be receivable it must impugn a decision notified to complainant on a date not before 30 December 1972. The decision of 17 November 1972 was the decision to transfer the complainant. "The complaint against it is clearly out of time."
Keywords:
complaint; date of notification; decision; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 213
31st Session, 1973
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant impugns the refusal of his claim for compensation dated 5 July 1972; his complaint filed with the Administrative Tribunal on 14 January 1973 "was not submitted within the time limits laid down by Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal and is therefore not receivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 211
30th Session, 1973
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant did not appeal in time against this decision and it has now become final."
Keywords:
internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
|
