Counterclaim (170,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Counterclaim
Total judgments found: 64
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
Judgment 4287
130th Session, 2020
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision lifting his non-disciplinary suspension from duties.
Consideration 6
Extract:
WIPO seeks a costs order against the complainant on the footing that his complaint is vexatious, an abuse of process and, in addition, the complainant has used entirely inappropriate and offensive language in his pleas. The Tribunal is not satisfied such an order should be made.
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 4233
129th Session, 2020
International Office of Epizootics
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to award him compensation for the moral harassment which he alleges he has suffered.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The OIE’s counterclaim for costs must also be dismissed since the complaint is not vexatious.
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 4160
128th Session, 2019
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks a redefinition of his employment relationship.
Consideration 16
Extract:
Without excluding on principle the possibility of issuing an order of this type against interveners in proceedings, the Tribunal will not accept WIPO’s claim in this case. While the filing of these applications to intervene, which were bound to be dismissed, just before the case was included on the list for the session is surprising, this unfortunate procedural initiative cannot nevertheless be regarded as constituting a clear abuse of procedure.
Keywords:
costs; counterclaim; interveners;
Judgment 4159
128th Session, 2019
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks a redefinition of his employment relationship and the setting aside of the decision not to renew his last contract of employment.
Consideration 17
Extract:
Without excluding on principle the possibility of issuing an order of this type against interveners in proceedings, the Tribunal will not accept WIPO’s claim in this case. While the filing of these applications to intervene, which were bound to be dismissed, just before the case was included on the list for the session is surprising, this unfortunate procedural initiative cannot nevertheless be regarded as constituting a clear abuse of procedure.
Keywords:
costs; counterclaim; interveners;
Judgment 4143
128th Session, 2019
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former official, challenges a letter from the Director of the Human Resources Services rejecting her request for damages and legal costs arising from the fact that the Commission reclassified at grade P-4 the post of Treasurer, which she held at grade P-3 before her separation from service.
Consideration 7
Extract:
Regarding the Commission’s counterclaim for costs, the following observations of the Tribunal in Judgment 3506, under 4, apply equally to the present case: “[w]ithout ruling out, as a matter of principle, the possibility of making such an order against a complainant (see, for example, Judgments 1884, 1962, 2211 and 3043), the Tribunal will avail itself of that possibility only in exceptional situations. Indeed, it is essential that the Tribunal should be open and accessible to international civil servants without the dissuasive and chilling effect of possible adverse awards of that kind. In the instant case, the [...] complaint cannot be regarded as manifestly vexatious, even though it was clearly irreceivable [...]”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1884, 1962, 2211, 3043, 3506
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 4140
128th Session, 2019
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to summarily dismiss her for serious misconduct during her probation period.
Consideration 12
Extract:
IFAD asks the Tribunal to order the complainant to reimburse the sum [...] which, according to IFAD, she owes to a credit agency offering its services to the staff of the organization. However, insofar as this counterclaim is not aimed at compensating IFAD for a damage arising out of the present proceedings as such, it must in any case be rejected as irreceivable as a consequence of the irreceivability of the complaint itself.
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 4025
126th Session, 2018
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision rejecting her request for payment of interest on the lump sum paid to her in respect of her separation entitlements.
Considerations 6 and 9-12
Extract:
The IAEA submits that the complaint is vexatious and constitutes an abuse of process. It requests that the Tribunal order the complainant to pay the costs of the proceedings including all filing fees. [...]
At this juncture, it is observed that bad faith cannot be automatically inferred solely on the basis of the filing of a large number of complaints by a litigant. This is well illustrated by a review of the twelve complaints referenced by the IAEA, one of which is the present complaint. The complainant was successful in six complaints and was awarded damages and costs; four complaints were dismissed; and one was withdrawn.
In Judgment 3568, under 5, the Tribunal framed relevant considerations in the awarding of costs against a complainant in the following terms:
“The Tribunal may indeed award costs against the authors of frivolous, vexatious and repeated complaints which absorb its resources and those of the defendant organisations and hamper the Tribunal’s ability to deal expeditiously with other complaints. Any such award must, however, remain exceptional, since it is essential that international civil servants’ access to an independent and impartial judicial body is not impeded by the prospect of an adverse award of costs if their complaint were to prove unfounded (see Judgments 1962, under 4, and 3196, under 7).”
A review of the complainant’s pleadings alone reflects a case that obviously had no possibility of success and is clearly frivolous. The complainant did not advance any positions that were arguable and relied on cases that are plainly distinguishable on the facts and a judgment that was overturned in relevant part on appeal.
Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed and the counterclaim for costs will be allowed. As this is the first occasion in the series of complaints against the IAEA in which the Tribunal will make an award of costs against this complainant, the amount will be nominal. The complainant will be ordered to pay the IAEA 100 euros in costs within sixty days of the date of the public delivery of this judgment.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1962, 3196, 3568
Keywords:
counterclaim; vexatious complaint;
Judgment 3996
126th Session, 2018
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to investigate her claim of harassment, the decision to permanently transfer her and the decision to offer her an extension of appointment in her new position.
Consideration 8
Extract:
Regarding the Commission’s counterclaims for costs, the Tribunal finds that in the circumstances, considering the complainant’s apparent perception of the facts, the complaints cannot be considered vexatious, and therefore the counterclaims for costs should be dismissed.
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 3961
125th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the Administrative Council’s implied rejection of his request to order an investigation into the unauthorised public disclosure of confidential information relating to ongoing disciplinary proceedings against him, and to initiate disciplinary proceedings against those involved.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The Tribunal shall not order the complainant to pay costs because, notwithstanding the fact that he has filed multiple complaints with duplicate requests, the present complaint cannot be regarded as vexatious by reason of its irreceivability.
Keywords:
counterclaim; vexatious complaint;
Judgment 3895
125th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3694.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The Tribunal shall not deal with the issue regarding the complainant’s abuse of process, as the Organisation did not file any formal counterclaim for costs (see Judgment 3815, consideration 12).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3815
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 3851
124th Session, 2017
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who held a fellowship contract at EMBL, challenges the rejection of his request to be paid unemployment benefits following his separation from the organization.
Consideration 6
Extract:
While it appears that the complainant was less than forthcoming in some instances in his pleadings, in the circumstances, the EMBL’s request for costs will not be granted.
Keywords:
counterclaim; legal brief;
Judgment 3815
124th Session, 2017
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant has filed an application for review of Judgment 3486.
Consideration 12
Extract:
The [Organisation] submits that the application is clearly vexatious.
The Tribunal shares that opinion, but since the defendant has not submitted a counterclaim for an order against the complainant on this basis, it cannot issue an order to that effect in this judgment.
Keywords:
counterclaim; vexatious complaint;
Judgment 3719
123rd Session, 2017
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The CTA seeks the review of Judgment 3437.
Consideration 7
Extract:
[A]ccording to the case law of the Tribunal, where an organisation seeks to challenge a judgment unfavourable to itself by way of an application for review, the staff member concerned cannot make a counterclaim for damages in the context of his or her submissions on the application. Such a claim arises from a separate cause of action and should be pursued separately (see Judgments 1504, under 13, 2806, under 10, and 3003, under 50).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1504, 2806, 3003
Keywords:
application for review; counterclaim; damages;
Judgment 3718
123rd Session, 2017
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The CTA seeks the review of Judgment 3436.
Consideration 7
Extract:
[A]ccording to the case law of the Tribunal, where an organisation seeks to challenge a judgment unfavourable to itself by way of an application for review, the staff member concerned cannot make a counterclaim for damages in the context of his or her submissions on the application. Such a claim arises from a separate cause of action and should be pursued separately (see Judgments 1504, under 13, 2806, under 10, and 3003, under 50).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1504, 2806, 3003
Keywords:
application for review; counterclaim; damages;
Judgment 3690
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants contest the deduction of maternity leave periods from the time taken into account for the payment of a collective reward to staff in active service during 2011.
Consideration 5
Extract:
The EPO seeks an order that the complainants pay some of their costs. This is inappropriate particularly given the fact that Judgment 3517 was not available to the complainants when they filed their complaints.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3517
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 3679
122nd Session, 2016
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to renew his contract.
Consideration 20
Extract:
As to EMBL’s counterclaim for an award of costs against the complainant, it bears recalling that the Tribunal’s case law states that such costs would be awarded only in exceptional cases in which it could penalise the filing or maintenance of a complaint as being vexatious or abusive (see, for example, Judgment 1962, consideration 5, and Judgment 3043, consideration 24). As the present complaint raises, among other issues, the lawfulness of the non-renewal of the complainant’s employment contract, which is neither vexatious nor abusive of process, the counterclaim is unfounded and will be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1962, 3043
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 3672
122nd Session, 2016
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to confirm his appointment at the end of his extended trial period.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The UPU has made a counterclaim for costs. Without ruling out, as a matter of principle, the possibility of making such an order against a complainant (see, for example, Judgments 1884, 1962, 2211 and 3043), the Tribunal will avail itself of that possibility only in exceptional situations. Indeed, it is essential that the Tribunal should be open and accessible to international civil servants without the dissuasive and chilling effect of possible adverse awards of that kind. In the present case, the complaint cannot be regarded as manifestly vexatious, even though it was irreceivable because internal remedies had not been exhausted (see Judgment 3506, under 4).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1884, 1962, 2211, 3043, 3506
Keywords:
costs; counterclaim;
Judgment 3648
122nd Session, 2016
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the validity of a competition process in which she participated and the lawfulness of the ensuing appointment.
Consideration 17
Extract:
WIPO has made a counterclaim for the complainant to be ordered to pay it a token sum of one Swiss franc as compensation for moral injury caused by the complainant’s pleadings. However, the Tribunal considers that, although their unnecessarily argumentative tone is regrettable, the complainant’s pleadings do not exceed the boundaries of the freedom of expression that the parties must be accorded during legal proceedings. This counterclaim must hence be dismissed.
Keywords:
counterclaim;
Judgment 3620
121st Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to retroactively implement the transitional measure accompanying the replacement of the former invalidity pension with an invalidity allowance.
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The EPO seeks a costs order against the complainant on the basis that she continued to pursue her complaint after Judgment 3291 was drawn to her attention in correspondence from the EPO’s lawyers in May 2014. The Tribunal concludes that such an order should not be made in the circumstances of the case, particularly where the complainant had commenced proceedings (on 8 July 2013) before the relevant decision had been published (5 February 2014)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3291
Keywords:
costs; counterclaim;
Judgment 3591
121st Session, 2016
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reduce his salary by half following the exhaustion of his entitlement to sick leave on full salary and pending a determination by an ad hoc medical board as to whether his illness is service-incurred.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; counterclaim; reduction of salary; salary; service-incurred; sick leave;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
|
