Claim (18, 19, 647, 20, 92, 675,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Claim
Total judgments found: 141
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
Judgment 2107
92nd Session, 2002
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"The complainant's claim that he should be considered as a fixed-term staff member cannot be sustained. The complainant was recruited as a short-term staff member, without having to go through a competition process; he accepted several contract renewals. It was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide during the years that the complainant was with the organization whether to renew each short-term contract or offer him a fixed-term contract. There is no basis on which the complainant can claim to be treated retroactively as if he had a fixed-term contract. He was at all times a short-term staff member."
Keywords:
acceptance; appointment; claim; competition; complainant; contract; decision; discretion; executive head; fixed-term; non-retroactivity; official; participation; refusal; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;
Judgment 2065
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
"In this application the complainant is challenging the decision of 31 August 2000 [...] However, the President's new decision of 11 April 2001 [...] has deprived the application of a cause of action. Since he claims costs, it must be determined whether the complainant did have a cause of action at the time of filing this application on 11 October 2000."
Keywords:
application for execution; cause of action; claim; costs; date; decision; executive head; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 2063
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
After the complainant underwent surgery, the insurance brokers refused to cover his convalescence in a home. "In order to assess any physical injury suffered by the complainant, it is necessary to ascertain the later consequences for his health of the refusal to meet the costs of his admission to a convalescent home, and the fact that he did not as a result stay in such a home. These are purely medical matters which [...] need to be referred to the Invalidity Committee".
Keywords:
claim; competence; consequence; health insurance; illness; medical board; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; refund; refusal; request by a party;
Judgment 2061
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal [...] does not have the authority to issue recommendations about an organisation's general policy."
Keywords:
claim; competence of tribunal; receivability of the complaint; recommendation;
Judgment 2058
91st Session, 2001
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The complainant asks that the defendant be ordered to publish a denial of the accusations made in [a flash published by the staff union]. It is not, however, for the Tribunal to issue such an injunction."
Keywords:
claim; competence of tribunal; moral injury; publication; receivability of the complaint; respect for dignity; staff union;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The [Organization] is right to object to the receivability of [the complaintant's] claim to the quashing of the invitation to him to write letters of apology. Although one of a set of measures devised by the organization in an attempt to put an end to this regrettable affair, the 'invitation' does not constitute, contrary to what the complainant asserts, a decision that can be set aside. If, however, the measure was proved to be excessive, as the complainant contends it is, his claim to compensation for moral injury arising from the affront to his dignity could be justified." (This is not the case here: see consideration 14.)
Keywords:
claim; complaint; decision; decision quashed; moral injury; proposal; receivability of the complaint; respect for dignity;
Judgment 1979
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Consistent precedent holds that, since judgments carry the authority of res judicata only for the parties to a dispute (see Judgment 1935 [...]), complainants may not put forward claims for the whole staff, but only for themselves. The complaints are irreceivable insofar as they address the position of persons who are not parties to this suit."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1935
Keywords:
binding character; case law; claim; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; res judicata; same parties;
Judgment 1963
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant [...] wants the President to be ordered to intervene so that the Administrative Council amends the Service Regulations. However, firm precedent has it that the Tribunal may not order such action [...] only in the event that the Office were under an obligation to change its rules in order to ensure respect for the fundamental conditions of service of staff members would the latter, faced with the silence or inaction of the administration, be entitled to challenge the unlawfulness of their situation. In the present case, however, it is fully within the competence of the President and the Administrative Council to amend or not the impugned provisions of the Service Regulations. [...] The complainant cannot plead any breach of his fundamental rights or guarantees as a result of the maintenance of rules which [...] are not unlawful."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1456, 1591
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; claim; competence of tribunal; discretion; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1929
88th Session, 2000
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is not in the interests of the complainant to seek a ruling in law [...] when in practice he can obtain the quashing of the decision and redress."
Keywords:
claim; judgment of the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; right;
Judgment 1877
87th Session, 1999
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The [organisation] rightly asserts that out of respect for the lawfulness of the Administration's action and the equality of treatment of staff it is obliged to respect rules prescribing time limits (see Judgment 1502, in re Baillon, under 6 and the judgments cited therein). However, both organisation and staff members are each required to respect the rules of good faith (see Judgment 1756 in re Awoyemi, and the judgments cited therein), especially in cases of respect for time limits. "If an organisation wants to put procedural restrictions on one of the staff member's rights or on the exercise thereof it must draft clearly enough to avoid setting traps. If it fails to do so, the text may be construed in the staff member's favour" (see Judgment 1502 under 6). The Tribunal also noted that the time limit for claims must start "at the date at which payment becomes due. If that were not so, the lapse of time would work to the claimant's detriment for as long as the rules precluded his making the claim" (see the same Judgment under 9).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1502
Keywords:
claim; time limit;
Judgment 1792
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Someone who intervenes in a complaint [...] may not put forward any pleas but the complainant's. The intervener must have the same claims as the complainant and seek the same redress on the strength of the same pleas." (See Judgments 365 and 366.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 365, 366
Keywords:
application for execution; claim; complaint; difference; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; new claim; new plea;
Judgment 1763
85th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[W]ith respect to the complainant's submission that the Disciplinary Board's report is not valid because it is not dated, signed or otherwise authenticated, the 'report' is actually a summary record of the Board's meetings. There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the record is not an accurate summary of the Board's views, and it was clearly adopted by the Board, as well as the [Organisation], as representing them. The substance of the summary record clearly indicates the conclusion of the Board. There is thus no irregularity in the form of the report."
Keywords:
claim; disciplinary procedure; formal flaw; formal requirements; report;
Judgment 1734
85th Session, 1998
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The observance of time limits is not an empty formality but essential to sound management. Only in exceptional cases may they be waived, namely when to demand strict compliance would cause a flagrant miscarriage of justice and good faith must instead prevail. Of course the rules of good faith apply to organisation and employee alike. It would be in bad faith for the organisation to make a staff member bear the consequences of any obscurity in the rules or in its dealings with him. Thus the Tribunal has often ruled that time limits and other procedural requirements should not set traps: see Judgments 522 [...], 607 [...], 873 [...], 1247 [...], 1317 [...], 1376 [...] and 1502 [...]. Likewise, good faith requires the staff member to pay due heed to the organisation's rules on such matters as dispute procedures. Written rules are there to be consulted and, if need be, the staff member may seek help from colleagues, from a staff association or from counsel in understanding them.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 522, 607, 873, 1247, 1317, 1376, 1502
Keywords:
claim; time limit;
Judgment 1666
83rd Session, 1997
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4(a)
Extract:
"A claim to a ruling in law will be receivable only if the complainant shows some cause of action. Generally he may not do so if he may instead challenge a specific decision in support of his claim to redress. "Here the complainant makes two claims to rulings in law. The first seems to have been made only to lend substance to his claims to redress. "It cannot stand on its own since it shows no cause of action that the complainant may have."
Keywords:
cause of action; claim; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1595
82nd Session, 1997
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Tribunal "may not replace the Organisation's assessment of the applicants with its own and order any particular appointment. So the complaint is irreceivable insofar as the complainant is claiming reinstatement in her former duties and permanent appointment to the post."
Keywords:
appointment; claim; competence of tribunal; discretion; judicial review; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1591
82nd Session, 1997
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Tribunal may not order the Chairman of the EPO's Council to offer him an apology. It "is not competent to issue an order of that kind to the authorities of an international organisation."
Keywords:
claim; competence of tribunal; executive body; receivability of the complaint; summary procedure;
Judgment 1547
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The claim by Mr. C. to an award of damages to the union is irreceivable because his complaint is in his own name."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff union;
Judgment 1532
81st Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"Claim 8 is to costs. Again the Tribunal reminds [the complainant], in view of the intemperate language of his submissions, that he owes a duty of respect to the Organization and to its staff. Because he has failed in that duty the Tribunal disallows his claim to costs, even though one of his claims succeeds."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; conduct; costs; freedom of speech; limits; no award of costs; organisation's reputation; staff member's duties;
Judgment 1519
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The organization "objects that [one of] the complainants' [pleas] is irreceivable because they did not put it forward in support of their original claim. The objection is mistaken: receivability depends on the making of prior claims, not of prior pleas. [...] They may enter whatever pleas they like, including any they did not make in support of their internal appeal."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; internal appeal; new claim; new plea; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1504
81st Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"It is not appropriate for [the complainant] to make a counterclaim to damages [for the moral injury allegedly caused to her] in the context of her submissions on an application by the organization for review [...] The claim arises out of a separate cause of action and is one that she should pursue separately."
Keywords:
application for review; claim; counterclaim; moral injury; new claim;
Judgment 1500
80th Session, 1996
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant filed within the time limit in the Statute the complaint form provided for in the Schedule to the Rules. The entries sufficed to identify the decision he was impugning and the relief he was claiming. The registering of the complaint and the correcting of it within the time limit were in line with the Rules. Since the complaint was lodged in time the Organization's objection to receivability fails."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; correction of complaint; decision; formal requirements; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
|
