Reply (169, 170, 171,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Reply
Total judgments found: 43

< previous | 1, 2, 3

• Judgment 721

  
  58th Session, 1986
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  "The defendant has the duty to enable the court to give a full ruling on the case before it. [...] The EPO was bound to address properly the issues of fact and of law raised by the complainant. Since it has not the Tribunal will accept the complainant's allegations of fact".

  Keywords:

  consequence; organisation; organisation's duties; reply; submissions;
  

  
  
  

• 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;
  

  Consideration 18

  Extract:

  "While it is generally to be expected that an organisation will lay its whole case on the merits before the Appeals Board so as to enable that body to give the best an most complete advice to the Director-General, its omission to take a particular point will not as a general rule prevent the consideration of that point by the Tribunal. This is because it is the duty of the Tribunal to arrive insofar as it can at a just decision on all the merits."

  Keywords:

  new plea; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 173

  
  26th Session, 1971
  European Organization for Nuclear Research
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 1

  Extract:

  "[A]n organization may not submit a complaint to the Tribunal nor [...] claims for the modification of the impugned decision to the prejudice of the complainant." It may simply propose that the original complaint be dismissed in whole or in part. "Consequently, the organization's claims in the present case are irreceivable to the extent that they relate to the reduction of the complainant's pension."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 141
  

  Keywords:

  claim; counterclaim; impugned decision; locus standi; pension; reply;
  

< previous | 1, 2, 3