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 647
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Even if the letter [...] had been written without authority, the decision therein would not cease to exist on that account. [...] Provided a communication takes the form of a decision its lawfulness is immaterial to the reckoning of the time limit for lodging an appeal. To hold otherwise would impair the stability of the parties' position in law, which is the purpose and indeed the whole point of a time limit."
Keywords:
competence; consequence; decision; decision-maker; flaw; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 634
54th Session, 1984
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The internal appeal lodged by the complainant was time-barred. Thus, "he has failed to comply with the provisions of Article VII of the Statute of the Administrative Tribunal, which require that he shall have exhausted such other means of resisting the impugned decision as were open to him under the applicable Staff Regulations."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 630
54th Session, 1984
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The complainant argues that the unfair treatment lies in her being kept idle for so long. Accordingly the time limit for filing an appeal did not begin on the date on which her supervisor decided, while keeping her on her post, to give her no more work: the injury occurred only with the passage of time. Thus, although it was only after being kept idle for a considerable lapse of time that the complainant appealed to the Director-General, and then to the Tribunal, for compensation for the injury she alleged, her claims are not time-barred and her complaint is receivable."
Keywords:
compensation; complaint; date; executive head; iloat; injury; internal appeal; period; post; receivability of the complaint; refusal to assign work; request by a party; start of time limit; supervisor; time bar;
Judgment 612
53rd Session, 1984
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant's submission of an internal appeal was time-barred; for not having correctly followed the internal procedure, her complaint is irreceivable. The discovery of an allegedly unlawful decision does not affect the time limit for internal appeal. The only exception is where the organisation has misled the complainant in breach of good faith.
Keywords:
consequence; decision; exception; flaw; good faith; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 607
52nd Session, 1984
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The organisation contends that the complainant, who knew that his contract had expired, had no reason to expect to be notified of its non-renewal. He should therefore have challenged the decision not to renew, which was implicit in the expiry of his appointment, in time. "To allow [the organisation's] plea would enable its competent officers to resolve to deal with such questions only if they thought fit. That would make for an increase in the number of claims dealt with ex gratia on the grounds that they had not been lodged on expiry of the appointment, and so administration would become arbitrary."
Keywords:
contract; fixed-term; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 5
Extract:
On questions of principle, the Tribunal holds that "a staff member whose fixed-term appointment has expired may not be declared out of time so long as his former employer has not informed him of the non-renewal. Normally, the non-renewal will be an explicit decision. Only where a staff member has expressly applied for renewal will rejection of his application be implied on the expiry of the time limits set".
Keywords:
condition; contract; express decision; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 603
52nd Session, 1984
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Article VII(1) says that a complaint shall not be receivable unless the means of redress provided under the Staff Regulations have been exhausted. It is not enough just to make an internal appeal; it must be submitted in time. And there the complainant failed [...] to abide by the [...] time-limit. Since she did not follow the internal procedure correctly her complaint is irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant's "later discovery that the administration's decision might have been unlawful does not affect the time limit, which is an objective matter of fact and starts on the date on which the impugned decision was notified. Any other conclusion, even if founded on considerations of equity, would impair the stability of the parties' position in law, which is the purpose and indeed the whole point of setting a time limit. The only exception is where the organisation has misled the complainant and is therefore in breach of good faith."
Keywords:
consequence; date of notification; decision; exception; flaw; good faith; internal appeal; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 602
52nd Session, 1984
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
Vide Judgment 603, consideration 3.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 603
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 3
Extract:
Vide Judgment 603, consideration 3.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 603
Keywords:
consequence; date of notification; decision; exception; flaw; good faith; internal appeal; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 601
52nd Session, 1984
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant was employed by the organization for eight years in a project. His appointment was due to expire on 31 July 1981. On 4 June the organization confirmed his termination. The position was not filled again. About a year later, the complainant consulted a lawyer with the result that on 9 June 1982 he filed a claim for an indemnity due to the fact that his position was abolished. A claim of this form cannot possibly succeed.
Keywords:
internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 586
51st Session, 1983
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-4
Extract:
"The question is [...] whether the claim which was rejected [...] had not only the same purpose - reinstatement - but also the same legal basis as the one rejected by the impugned decision". The examination "leaves no doubt that the impugned decision, though not in the same terms [...] had the same meaning and purport: it merely confirmed" the organisation's view. "It is therefore plain that the impugned decision was no more than confirmation and gave rise to no new time limit."
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 575
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to Article VII[1] of the Statute of the Tribunal a complaint will not be receivable unless the means of redress provided by the Staff Regulations have been exhausted. To fulfil this condition it is not sufficient to address an appeal to the internal appeal bodies; the internal appeal must be submitted in time." In this case, the prescribed time limit was not respected. "Accordingly, the internal appeals procedure was not correctly followed, and the [...] complaint is irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Summary
Extract:
The complaint is declared irreceivable, the internal means of redress not having been exhausted. The appeal was submitted to the President after the time-limit laid down in the Regulations had run out. It is immaterial that the Appeals Committee considered the complainant's case on the merits; its opinion does not prevent the Tribunal from observing that the time limit was not respected.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal appeals body; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 548
50th Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The time limit for submitting an internal appeal had long since expired when the complainant appealed to the Appeals Board. "The acceptance of his resignation had by then become final and was no longer open to challenge. His involvement in a serious accident [...] did not have the effect of suspending the time limit. The Director therefore correctly applied the rules in dismissing the appeal which the complainant addressed to him against the decision [to reject the internal appeal as being time-barred and therefore irreceivable]."
Keywords:
exception; internal appeal; new time limit; professional accident; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 528
49th Session, 1982
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Although the complainant took over eleven years to file a claim, it will not be declared time-barred in the absence of an express time limit. The time bar extinguishes obligations, and its existence will not be presumed: it must be expressly prescribed. [...] The sole consequence of the delay in lodging the claim is that proof is more difficult; but the matter is one of fact, not of law."
Keywords:
complaint; illness; invalidity; no provision; receivability of the complaint; service-incurred; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 522
49th Session, 1982
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
For having failed to indicate before the Appeals Board that the internal appeal against a decision dating from 11 December 1980 was out of time [the organization had argued on the basis of a letter of 22 November 1978 which cannot, according to the Tribunal, be regarded as a decision], the organization cannot to any useful purpose put the argument before the Tribunal. The argument is neither clear nor binding. It is unclear why the organization did not take the point during the internal appeal. In failing to do so, it may have prejudiced the complainant's position.
Keywords:
internal appeal; new plea; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply; time bar;
Judgment 518
49th Session, 1982
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"That an intervener in a case before the Tribunal may have already filed an internal appeal and had it rejected, and that he has not himself filed a complaint with a tribunal, does not prevent him from applying to intervene in such a complaint provided he complies with the requirements of Article 17 of the Rules of court and Article II of the Statute and provided the judgment to be given by the Tribunal may affect his rights."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 17 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
internal appeal; intervention; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 478
47th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant's first claim was rejected. In his reply to the second, which was based on the same cause of action as the first, "the Director, who had carried out no further inquiry, merely confirmed his earlier position. The [second] decision [...] was therefore purely confirmatory in character and did not give rise to any new time limit." As the time limit was not extended, the appeal is time-barred.
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; decision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 432
45th Session, 1980
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The Tribunal holds the medical report to be the final decision. In it the reasons for the decision are stated in clear and unambiguous terms. The word "decision" occurs in the text. The complaint is time-barred and irreceivable.
Keywords:
complaint; date of notification; decision; medical opinion; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 430
45th Session, 1980
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complaint was time-barred and thus irreceivable. The complainant's letter requesting an explanation for the non-confirmation of his appointment cannot be regarded as an application for further consideration on which the organisation should have acted. Consequently, the letter did not have the effect of setting a new time limit for filing a complaint with the Tribunal.
Keywords:
complaint; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 413
44th Session, 1980
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
On 29 November 1978 the Director-General informed the complainant of his intention to renew his contract for one year, but that it could not be renewed for any longer. On 28 February 1979 the complainant asked on what grounds he had been dismissed. On 15 March the Director-General, in drawing a distinction between the expiry of a fixed-term contract and dismissal, declined to give the explanation asked for. "Thus [he] merely upheld the decision taken on 29 November [...] and so set no new time limit for filing a complaint." The complaint, dated 20 May 1979, is time-barred.
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 404
43rd Session, 1980
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant was aware of the existence and the conclusion of the report mentioned in the minutes. She should have asked for its disclosure shortly after learning of its existence and, if necessary, appealed to the Tribunal. "Being herself to blame for being ignorant of its contents, she cannot, long after it was written, argue on the grounds of such ignorance that all the decisions affecting her are null and void. Her attitude implies that she did not wish to consult the minute. In other words she surrendered her right to give her views."
Keywords:
complainant; disclosure of evidence; request by a party; time bar;
Judgment 398
43rd Session, 1980
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
The Staff Regulations provide for two means of redress: requests and complaints. The "request" in question showed the characteristics of a complaint. The prescribed time limit having obviously expired, the Director declared the complainant's application time-barred. When she filed a further complaint, it was proper for him to uphold his earlier decision.
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
|
