Judgment 2724
105th Session, 2008
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal's power to order the filing of further submissions may be exercised at any stage of the proceedings."
Keywords:
further submissions; order; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 2510
100th Session, 2006
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The Tribunal has consistently held that it will not order the production of documents on the speculative basis that something might be found to further the complainant's case."
Keywords:
disclosure of evidence; evidence; further submissions; order; procedure before the tribunal; request by a party; submissions;
Judgment 2458
99th Session, 2005
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3 and 7
Extract:
In Judgment 2189 the Tribunal ordered the Organization to "appoint a medical board without delay". The complainant filed an application for execution of that judgment. "Once again, the complainant attempts to bypass the internal remedies, and have her internal appeal, which has been pending for over ten years, heard by the Tribunal on its merits. To do so, she would have to persuade the Tribunal that the failure of the medical board to take up and report on her claim and thereby allow her internal appeal to proceed was due to the wilful fault or neglect of UNIDO. [But] it is clear that [...] by July 2003, the necessary preliminary steps to set up the medical board had been taken and that the delays which took place after that time were largely due to the complainant herself. [...]
The obligation imposed on the Organization by Judgment 2189 to establish a medical board without delay is not wholly a one-way street. The complainant owes a duty of good faith and in the circumstances this includes not only the duty not to impede or prevent the medical board's functioning [...] but also the duty actively to collaborate with the board and to allow it to undertake its duties effectively. If the complainant had reservations about the terms of reference of the board she no doubt had the right to make them known as she did, but she could not insist on them as non-negotiable conditions precedent to the board carrying out its inquiry."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2189
Keywords:
application for execution; delay; execution of judgment; good faith; internal appeal; medical board; order; procedure before the tribunal; request by a party; staff member's duties; time limit;
Judgment 1883
87th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
"The complainant contests [the non-renewal of his contract] by a motion for an interlocutory order, [he] seeks preliminary injunctive relief to force the organization to place him on unpaid leave of absence and to offer him contract work as available. [T]o allow the motion would of necessity decide the principal issue in the complaint which is before the Tribunal on the merits. The requested injunction would have the effect of altering the status quo. The reply raises serious issues which should only be determined on the merits." The Tribunal adds that "the allegation of irreparable harm is unconvincing" [and that] "the balance of hardships favours the organization."
Keywords:
compensation; contract; interlocutory order; non-renewal of contract; order;
Judgment 1029
69th Session, 1990
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Order
Extract:
"Since the parties are agreed on the suspension of the proceedings the organisation's application is granted."
Keywords:
order; order of suspension; organisation; request by a party;
Judgment 809
61st Session, 1987
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Order
Extract:
"The President may direct proceedings and even if not expressly so empowered may order suspension. Since a complainant may withdraw a complaint he may also apply for suspension. Such application will succeed unless the advantage to the complainant of suspending the proceedings is outweighed by the advantage to the defendant of pursuing them."
Keywords:
competence; implied powers; no provision; order; order of suspension; organisation's interest; president of the tribunal; procedure before the tribunal; request by a party; staff member's interest; withdrawal of suit;
Order
Extract:
"Continuation of the suspension might [...] needlessly hold up the proceedings and cause detriment to the defendant without serving the interests of the complainant. The application accordingly fails".
Keywords:
extension of contract; order; order of suspension; president of the tribunal; refusal; request by a party;
Judgment 558
50th Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The organisation is opposed to the disclosure of the report [on which the impugned decision is based] on the grounds that the report is an internal document not included in the items which the service regulations require to be put in a staff member's personal file. "There are two reasons why the complainant's application should succeed. First, it concerns a report which deals with the point in dispute and which has a bearing on the Tribunal's decision. Secondly, the impugned decision does not give the reasons set out in the report, even though it does not describe the report as confidential."
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; interlocutory order; order; report; request by a party;
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
"In the course of the written proceedings, the complainant applied to the President of the Tribunal for an order for the production of the report on which the impugned decision was based." Her application succeeds. "When in session the Tribunal itself will order measures of investigation, and the President has communicated the complainant's application to the Tribunal, which is holding its [...] session."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; disclosure of evidence; interlocutory order; order; president of the tribunal; request by a party;
Judgment 557
50th Session, 1983
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3(C) and 4(C)
Extract:
The complainant is seeking the disclosure of all confidential minutes exchanged between the units of the administration. The organisation "maintains that there are no secret minutes besides those which have been filed in the dossier. The Tribunal accepts this, and [the relevant claim] therefore fails."
Keywords:
cause of action; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; interlocutory order; no cause of action; order; request by a party;
Considerations 3(D) and 4(D)
Extract:
The complainant is seeking an end to the harassment which he has suffered since filing his first complaint. "This claim is irreceivable since the complainant is seeking neither a 'measure of investigation' within the meaning of Article 11 of the Rules of court nor a measure 'intended to establish the existence of facts' within the meaning of Article 19."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLES 11 AND 19 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
order; receivability of the complaint; request by a party;
Judgment 556
50th Session, 1983
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant is not entitled to consult any record of discussion by the Selection Board. "Members of selection boards would not feel free to discuss candidates independently in future if they were at risk of having their personal views divulged."
Keywords:
competition; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; interlocutory order; order; report; request by a party; selection board; selection procedure;
Consideration 2
Extract:
Article 19 of the Rules of court "empowers the President to make such orders only in the interval between sessions. Thus when in session the Tribunal itself will order measures of investigation in accordance with Article 11(1) of its Rules."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLES 11 AND 19 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; iloat statute; inquiry; interlocutory order; investigation; order; submissions;
Judgment 177
26th Session, 1971
United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Preamble
Extract:
The President of the Tribunal issued an order to the Registrar instructing him "to make inquiries of the intergovernmental organisations with headquarters at Geneva concerning the practice followed by them in respect of reimbursement of tax paid on earned income by members of their staff".
Keywords:
inquiry; investigation; order; practice; refund; rule of another organisation; tax;
Judgment 141
22nd Session, 1969
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Interlocutory Order
Extract:
The Tribunal orders a medical examination. "The organization shall advance the cost of the expert examination and [the complainant's] expenses in submitting himself for the examination. The amount of these advances shall be determined by order of the Vice-President of the Tribunal."
Keywords:
cost of expert inquiry; expert inquiry; interlocutory order; medical examination; order;
Interlocutory Order
Extract:
"The experts shall be appointed by order of the Vice-President of the Tribunal, who shall determine the procedure for the examination and in particular, after consulting the parties, determine the final text of the questions to be put to the experts."
Keywords:
expert inquiry; order; procedure before the tribunal;
