Intervention (70, 804, 805, 806, 807, 808, 809, 810, 811,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Intervention
Total judgments found: 85
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
Judgment 2311
96th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The complaints must [...] be dismissed. Consequently, the applications to intervene filed by interveners whose claims are the same as the complainants' must likewise be dismissed. Insofar as some of the applications to intervene include other claims, they are irreceivable, as are those submitted by unidentified claimants."
Keywords:
claim; complainant; complaint; difference; identical claims; intervention; official; receivability of the complaint; request by a party;
Judgment 2239
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Since the complaints fail, so must the applications to intervene, it being noted that certain claims they contain which differ from those submitted in the complaints are in any case irreceivable."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; difference; intervention; new claim; receivability of the complaint; refusal; request by a party;
Judgment 2237
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The application to intervene that has been filed must be dismissed since the applicant is not in the same situation in fact and in law to that of the complainant.
Keywords:
complainant; difference; intervention; refusal; request by a party; right;
Judgment 2236
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The right to intervene in a complaint filed before the Tribunal is available to persons who wish to claim the benefit of the judgment rendered on that complaint, without having themselves exhausted the remedies available to them. since the intervener has availed himself of the internal remedies and filed a complaint before the Tribunal on which judgment is delivered this day, his application to intervene is, therefore, irreceivable."
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; effect; intention of parties; internal appeal; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; right; status of complainant;
Judgment 2220
95th Session, 2003
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant is asking for the execution of a judgment in which he was neither a party nor an intervener. He "claims that [that] judgment constitutes an exception to the general rule of res judicata because it is of "general" application. There is no such exception to the rule. The judgments of the Tribunal operate only in personam and not in rem. Notwithstanding the generality of the terms in which the Tribunal may dispose of a case before it, the judgment has effect only as between the parties to it. The complainant confuses the rule of res judicata with the rule of stare decisis. The former, which is a rule of law, applies absolutely when the necessary three identities of person, cause and object are present, which is not the case here. the latter rule, which is simply a matter of judicial practice or of comity, holds that, in general, the Tribunal will follow its own precedents and that the latter have authority even as against persons and organisations who were not party thereto, unless it is persuaded such precedents were wrong in law or in fact or that for any other compelling reason they should not be applied."
Keywords:
binding character; case law; complainant; effect; enforcement; exception; execution of judgment; general principle; grounds; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; limits; mistake of fact; organisation; practice; purport; request by a party; res judicata; right; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose; status of complainant;
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant is asking for the execution of a judgment in which he was neither a party nor an intervener. "Sound judicial policy requires that the Tribunal encourage parties to settle their disputes after as well as before judgment. That cannot happen if persons, like the complainant, who did not participate in a case, even though he might have done so, can interfere after the fact and prevent such settlement."
Keywords:
complainant; execution of judgment; general principle; iloat; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; request by a party; right; settlement out of court; status of complainant;
Judgment 2196
94th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
The complaints will be allowed and the impugned decisions will be set aside. Each complainant is entitled to moral damages of 1,000 euros and they shall jointly receive costs in the amount of 1,000 euros. The intervener shall benefit from the nullity of the impugned decisions but is not entitled to any damages or costs.
Keywords:
intervention; moral damages;
Judgment 2151
93rd Session, 2002
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"In the Tribunal's view, the fact that [...] two staff members [...] filed no internal appeal does not prevent them from applying to intervene (see Judgment 518). The only issue to be resolved is whether the organisation's decisions on post classification apply to them. [...] This judgment should be extended to them only insofar as they have an interest, on account of their de jure and de facto position regarding post classification, in benefiting from the Tribunal's decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 518
Keywords:
cause of action; enforcement; internal remedies exhausted; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; post; post classification; post held by the complainant;
Judgment 1934
88th Session, 2000
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The complainant cannot invoke in his favour res judicata in a case to which he was neither party nor intervener."
Keywords:
complainant; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; locus standi; res judicata;
Judgment 1870
87th Session, 1999
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
Mr. B., intervening in a previous case, had resorted to an expert in graphology in order to prove that the complainant, who contested his appointment to a post, had falsified documents. He seeks reimbursement of the costs incurred in obtaining this expert opinion. "The steps he took were not necessary since, when expert opinion is required, it is for the Tribunal to order it on its own motion or on the application of another party (Article 11 of the Rules of the Tribunal). Mr. B. should therefore have confined himself to submitting the question to the Tribunal, which would have judged the pertinence of the matter and the validity of the proof supplied. The costs which he incurred in obtaining an extra-judicial expert opinion, which cannot replace a judicial expert opinion, were not therefore necessary." So they are not reimbursable by the organisation.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 11 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
complaint; cost of expert inquiry; expert inquiry; further submissions; intervention; submissions;
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 1558
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Mr. V., who defended the complainant before the Disciplinary Committee, has filed an application to intervene in the complaint on the grounds that the EPO has harmed his good name by making false, defamatory and insulting remarks about him in its surrejoinder. That matter falls outside the scope of the complaint before the Tribunal, whose ruling can have no bearing on Mr. V.'s grievance. His application is therefore disallowed."
Keywords:
complaint; decision; effect; intervention; moral injury; organisation's duties; request by a party; respect for dignity;
Judgment 1462
79th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
Another official has applied to intervene in the complaints. "Since the complaints [...] are irreceivable so is her application to intervene in them."
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; intervention; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The intervener offers no factual evidence to show that her duties entitled her to the allowance. She merely says that she is in the same position as two of the complainants. "She neither shows nor even seeks to show that she is in the same position in fact and in law as others who are claiming the allowance in complaints to the Tribunal. So her application is [...] irreceivable."
Keywords:
condition; identical claims; identical facts; intervention; receivability of the complaint; same purpose;
Judgment 1451
79th Session, 1995
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 21
Extract:
"The [organisation pleads] that to quash a general decision on an application from a few might damage the interests of others who wanted it to remain in force. The plea is certainly material since [...] the staff of the UPU seem to disagree about the amendment [in question]. But the Tribunal is satisfied that when a decision has been challenged, albeit by only a few, it has a duty to rule in full objectivity and as soon as possible. The Union itself has well defended the interests of those who want to keep the decision, and they themselves may do so by filing applications to intervene."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; application for quashing; complaint; general decision; intervention; receivability of the complaint; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1442
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
A staff member's application to intervene succeeds "insofar as his claims concur with the complainant's and he is in like case. But insofar as he objects to certain statements in the surrejoinder and seeks compensation for injury the organisation's attitude caused him, he is raising issues of no relevance to this case and to that extent his application is irreceivable."
Keywords:
condition; intervention; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1374
77th Session, 1994
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"Even if the reduction-in-force procedure had been properly carried out the letters [which the PAHO sent the complainants] did not give valid notice of termination. They gave the complainants only just over one month's notice [...], not the three months to which they were entitled under Rule 1050.3. For that reason too the complainants' contracts must be deemed to have been extended by implication."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PAHO STAFF RULE 1050.3
Keywords:
contract; flaw; intervention; non-renewal of contract; notice; procedure before the tribunal; reinstatement; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; time limit;
Judgment 1331
76th Session, 1994
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The Organization has not challenged the right of [...] as another applicant for the post to intervene in the complaint. Her intervention is allowed but since she has failed to show any moral injury she is not awarded any sum under that head.
Keywords:
intervention; moral damages;
Judgment 1311
76th Session, 1994
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 21
Extract:
The complainant, who reached retirement age, is challenging the amount he received in terminal entitlements. Two former officials, also retirees, have filed applications to intervene. "It appears from the wording of the applications that the interveners' cases were settled once and for all when they left the ESO. Their entitlements are therefore beyond challenge and this judgment may neither reduce nor increase them. The applications fail."
Keywords:
intervention; reckoning; request by a party; retirement; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 1287
75th Session, 1993
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The application to intervene having been filed after the Tribunal's session had started, it is "declared irreceivable under Article 17(4) of the Rules of court".
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 17(4) OF THE RULES
Keywords:
closure of written proceedings; iloat statute; intervention; refusal; request by a party;
Judgment 983
66th Session, 1989
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant withdrew her application. One of the interveners stated objections to the withdrawal. The Tribunal held those objections to be inadmissible. The intervener cannot have greater rights than the complainant, who alone may determine whether to maintain his suit.
Keywords:
effect; intervention; withdrawal of suit;
Judgment 978
66th Session, 1989
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
"None of the interveners is barred by any lapse of time from claiming entitlement to the non-resident's allowance and to the other benefits. [...] Acquiescence is not a valid plea open to the organization and a woman staff member may at any time object to discriminatory treatment."
Keywords:
allowance; continuing breach; equal treatment; intervention; non-resident allowance; receivability of the complaint; sex discrimination; time bar;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
|
