Receivability of the complaint (76, 77, 78, 947, 88, 89, 656, 743, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 734, 748, 749,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Receivability of the complaint
Total judgments found: 770
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 | next >
Judgment 518
49th Session, 1982
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"That an intervener in a case before the Tribunal may have already filed an internal appeal and had it rejected, and that he has not himself filed a complaint with a tribunal, does not prevent him from applying to intervene in such a complaint provided he complies with the requirements of Article 17 of the Rules of court and Article II of the Statute and provided the judgment to be given by the Tribunal may affect his rights."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 17 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
internal appeal; intervention; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 517
49th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The decision impugned was notified to the complainant on 25 May, and the ninety days accordingly expired on 23 August. Since 23 August was a sunday, the complaint, which was not filed until 24 August, is receivable.
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; date of notification; decision; public holiday; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 516
49th Session, 1982
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
After the lodging of an internal appeal - the complainant sought a further short-term appointment - an extension was granted from 1 April to 31 May. A further extension was granted retroactively on 3 November from 31 May to 31 July. "None of this means [...] that the appeal was allowed or that the [...] complaint is therefore without substance. The two short extensions were granted for compassionate reasons, and they were not tantamount either to acceptance of the appeal or to an offer of any further short-term appointment. Accordingly the complainant still has a cause of action and the Tribunal will hear his claims for relief."
Keywords:
cause of action; contract; extension of contract; fixed-term; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; receivability of the complaint; short-term;
Judgment 509
48th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The organisation argues that the Tribunal may only hear complaints filed by serving officials. "The argument fails. When someone leaves the staff he is entitled, then as indeed throughout his career, to compliance with the staff regulations. A tribunal is competent in regard to every aspect of the official's service, and the grant of a certificate is a necessary incident of his employment."
Keywords:
certificate of service; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; retirement; right of appeal; separation from service;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"[The complainant's] claims for compensation are irreceivable because there is no previous decision."
Keywords:
condition; decision; receivability of the complaint; request by a party;
Judgment 507
48th Session, 1982
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainants received letters dated 6 March signed by an officer of the personnel service terminating their employment upon the instructions of the Director-General. "It does not [...] follow from this [...] that the letter [...] was a final decision. It would not so follow even if that letter had been signed by the Director-General himself. Not every decision of the Director-General is a final decision. The complainants assumed rightly that the Director-General would not reach a final decision until after he had considered carefully what they had to say. His letter of 21 May was not, as the organisation contends, 'purely confirmatory' of the letter of 6 March and it contains the final decision. The objection to receivability is overruled."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; decision; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 502
48th Session, 1982
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant suffers from illnesses which, he alleges, are due to his duties in the organization. Before appealing to the Tribunal, he should have exhausted the internal remedies and appealed to the Advisory Committee; that step was left out and the complaint is therefore not receivable. The complainant is still entitled to put his claims forward at the administrative level. For that purpose the parties need only designate the members of the Medical Board provided for in the Rules.
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case sent back to organisation; illness; internal remedies exhausted; medical board; receivability of the complaint; service-incurred;
Judgment 501
48th Session, 1982
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The claims "for the issue of orders [by the Tribunal] to the organization are [...] irreceivable."
Keywords:
claim; competence of tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 500
48th Session, 1982
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"It does not appear that [the complainant] did appeal to the Director-General [as required under the applicable provisions]. His counsel may have written letters to the Director-General but the evidence does not show that they filed any claim in the proper sense of an appeal seeking the quashing or amendment of a decision. No internal appeal having been made and the internal means of redress not being exhausted, the claims are irreceivable."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; formal requirements; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 499
48th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"Article VII[1] does not lay down an absolute rule. A complainant may abandon the internal proceedings even before a decision is taken and may appeal directly to the Tribunal when the appeals body fails to report and there is no reason to suppose from the evidence that it is likely to do so within a reasonable period. But it must be quite clear from the evidence that there is no decision, and only in quite exceptional cases will the Tribunal find that the condition is met."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Considerations
Extract:
"The time limit for filing a complaint is ninety days, either after the notification of the express decision or from the expiry of the sixty-day time limit allowed for the taking of a decision by the organisation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; failure to answer claim; further submissions on the merits; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Considerations
Extract:
In May the complainant made known his intention to appeal against the transfer. The Director-General replied that he was willing to refer the matter to the Joint Committee. In August the administration said the Director-General, who was absent, had received a recommendation to that effect. In September it told the complainant that the matter would be put to the Committee. "These shifting attitudes, which in the end came to nothing and spanned four months, constitute exceptional circumstances and warranted a direct complaint to the Tribunal."
Keywords:
administrative delay; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 496
48th Session, 1982
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The Tribunal believes that any violation of the right to freedom of association, i.e. the right to set up a professional association, may be impugned by the holder of a contract of appointment. However, the staff association itself may not intervene in this case, since access to the Tribunal is restricted to officials alone.
Keywords:
cause of action; contract; freedom of association; locus standi; official; receivability of the complaint; staff union;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainants appealed to the internal board and then, without awaiting the outcome of the proceedings, to the Tribunal. By applying directly to the Tribunal "the complainants [...] obviously had no intention of abandoning their appeal; their wish was to expedite the hearing. As a matter of procedure they made a mistake in asking for the case to be withdrawn, but the situation was unprecedented and it was one to which the inactivity of the organization had contributed. A procedural error should not in this instance be held against the complainants."
Keywords:
administrative delay; direct appeal to tribunal; flaw; internal remedies exhausted; procedural flaw; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The staff association, being the formal organisation created under [the rules], seeks to intervene as a 'collective personality'. It is unnecessary to decide whether or not the association has such personality. Assuming that it has, it is not a personality which holds a contract of appointment by the organization so it is not a person to whom the Tribunal is open under Article II" of the Statute. The intervention is not receivable.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
intervention; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff union;
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
"The organization contends that the appeal was irreceivable by the [Appeal] Board and is therefore irreceivable by the Tribunal. [...] The complaint had been dismissed by the Tribunal under Judgment No. 408 [...] [this] ground fails. The appeal was dismissed as irreceivable. Such a dismissal constitutes no barrier to a second presentation if the objection of irreceivability can be overcome."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 408
Keywords:
complaint; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 493
48th Session, 1982
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The organisation's argument is that the time limit for filing the complaint started on [the date] the complainant's contract was extended [...]. The argument would succeed only if the later decisions [...] had merely confirmed the [extension] decision. But they did not. The extension of the contract [on the mentioned date] for three months did not necessarily mean that there would be no further extension."
Keywords:
complaint; contract; date; date of notification; decision; extension of contract; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit;
Judgment 489
48th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The time limit does not run from the date of the two communications from the organization which said that the complainants request was still under review, and they therefore did not constitute final rejection of his claim. "An appeal against either of those replies was therefore premature, the [organization] not having taken, by [the date when the internal appeal was filed], any final decision expressly rejecting the complainant's request." The Director-General was correct in deciding that the complainant's internal appeal was irreceivable. The complaint is dismissed.
Keywords:
absence of final decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Summary
Extract:
Under the Rules a claim is deemed to have been rejected if no definitive reply has been made within three months. The request for reclassification was submitted on 29 November 1979; three months later, on 1 March 1980, having received no reply, the complainant's request must be deemed to have been rejected. The complainant waited until 16 July 1980 to appeal to the internal appeals body. In the meantime, on 25 March and 19 June, he had been informed that the matter was being studied. The Director-General was correct in deciding that the internal appeal was irreceivable: there had been no final decision expressing rejection. The complaint is dismissed.
Keywords:
absence of final decision; failure to answer claim; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 478
47th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant's first claim was rejected. In his reply to the second, which was based on the same cause of action as the first, "the Director, who had carried out no further inquiry, merely confirmed his earlier position. The [second] decision [...] was therefore purely confirmatory in character and did not give rise to any new time limit." As the time limit was not extended, the appeal is time-barred.
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; decision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 475
47th Session, 1982
Intergovernmental Council of Copper Exporting Countries
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Under an exception to the rule, [the complainant's] claim for costs is receivable, though new, since the Tribunal awards costs proprio motu."
Keywords:
costs; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 474
47th Session, 1982
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The Staff Rules preclude appeals against non-renewal of appointment. The material provision "does have force within the organisation in that it preclude bringing certain appeals to the Director-General. [It] is not binding on the Tribunal, whose jurisdiction has been unconditionally recognised by the organisation and which will itself determine whether a complaint is receivable."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; contract; fixed-term; iloat statute; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; provision; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal;
Judgment 473
47th Session, 1982
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"The complainant filed his complaint within the time limit set in Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal. The fact that the Registrar invited him to supplement his complaint in accordance with Article 7 of the Rules of Court has no bearing on the question of receivability. In any event the complaint was brought into conformity with the Rules within the one-month time limit set in Article 7."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 7 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
complaint; correction of complaint; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Considerations
Extract:
The officials in question, who have applied to intervene, have rights which may be affected by the judgment to be given [...] even though they have not filed a claim with the organisation. Their applications are receivable.
Keywords:
cause of action; internal remedies exhausted; intervention; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 461
46th Session, 1981
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant did not file his internal appeal through the usual channels set out in the Staff Regulations. Besides, for there to be an appeal the person concerned must have clearly indicated his intention to challenge the decision to which he objects.
Keywords:
condition; internal appeal; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 452
46th Session, 1981
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
Only claims made to the internal appeals body and, when appropriate, implicit claims, satisfy the obligation to exhaust the internal means of resisting a decision. Claims first made directly to the Tribunal are not receivable.
Keywords:
complaint; internal remedies exhausted; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 451
46th Session, 1981
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
When an appeals body cannot examine a case "in the second instance" because no decision had been taken by the lower body, there is no obligation on an appellant to explore ways of putting pressure on the latter to discharge its duty. The complaint is receivable.
Keywords:
consequence; failure to answer claim; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The rule that a complaint shall be receivable only if the internal means of redress have been exhausted is not a hard and fast one even though the Statute does not allow any derogation from it. If a complainant does all in her power to procure a decision and if nevertheless the internal appeals body either by its statements or by its conduct evinces an intention not to give a decision within a reasonable period, justice requires that an exception should be made. [...] When the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, such an intention can be inferred."
Keywords:
administrative delay; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 442
46th Session, 1981
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"There may be either one or two stages in review proceedings. The Tribunal will first determine whether the plea is admissible. If it is not, the Tribunal will dismiss the application without looking further. If it holds any of the pleas to be admissible, it will then reconsider its judgment on the basis of the evidence adduced in the review proceedings. Those are the only circumstances in which the Tribunal will hear the complainant's submissions on the merits."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; claim; elements; judgment of the tribunal; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 8(G)
Extract:
An application for review "will fail unless it relies on flaws which may have an effect on the Tribunal's decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; condition; consequence; flaw; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 3
Extract:
Receivable grounds for review include the following: a fact overlooked, material error, omission to rule on a claim and the discovery of a new fact. The Tribunal has not had to declare in what cases such pleas will in general be allowed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; disregard of essential fact; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; omission to rule on a claim; receivability of the complaint;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 | next >
|
