Internal appeal (86, 87, 668, 695, 752, 783,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Internal appeal
Total judgments found: 463
< 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 | next >
Judgment 232
32nd Session, 1974
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[S]ince the complainant had let it be clearly understood that he would not attend the meeting and would be represented at it, the fact that he was not told of its exact date is immaterial to the propriety of the proceedings."
Keywords:
complainant; counsel; date; duty to inform; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; right to reply;
Judgment 223
31st Session, 1973
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant appealed to the Director against the decision to terminate his appointment. "He thus complied with the rule that an official must make a complaint to the Director of the organisation before filing a complaint with the Tribunal." The Director had the option under the Staff Regulations of referring the complaint to the internal body, but chose to reply to it.
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 221
31st Session, 1973
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The complainant does not allege that an obligation to pay the fees and expenses incident to an appeal is one of the terms of his appointment or the subject of any provision in the Staff Regulations [which contain no] general or implied obligation to pay costs. For this reason, the Tribunal is not competent to order the relief requested."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; counsel; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; refund;
Judgment 196
29th Session, 1972
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The appeal addressed to the Director-General was dismissed on 15 April. Whatever the date of the impugned decision, "the complainant could properly file an appeal as from 15 April [...] and consequently the claims he submitted to the Appeals Board on 27 April [...] were receivable. [H]ence the argument that the appeal was irreceivable affords no grounds for contending that the internal means of resisting the decision were not exhausted."
Keywords:
date; decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 186
27th Session, 1971
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Under the applicable provisions, "the period within which an appeal must be submitted against any administrative decision affecting [...] officials [of the organization] starts to run from the date of notification of the decision to the persons concerned." The rejection of the appeal for being time-barred is not flawed.
Keywords:
date; date of notification; decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar;
Judgment 185
27th Session, 1971
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant inquired whether a refusal decision was final. the absence of a reply from the administration must be considered, by virtue of a general rule of law, as a refusal of the claim. The complainant ought to have followed the procedure prescribed in the Staff Rules to secure "a decision by the Director-General, which decision could alone be impugned before the Administrative Tribunal." [The procedure provides for appeal at the regional level and subsequently at headquarters.]
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; enforcement; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; staff regulations and rules;
Considerations
Extract:
The regional administration failed to reply because it made a reply conditional on a matter unrelated to the request. "The position thus taken up by the administration misled [the complainant] and prevented him from following the procedure laid down [in the Staff Rules]. There is all the more reason for taking account of his error inasmuch as the [...] Rules do not mention the general rule of law [...] whereby the silence of the administration after a certain period is equivalent to rejection of a claim."
Keywords:
complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; negligence; organisation; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 181
27th Session, 1971
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[T]he Director-General was at fault in ruling that the complainant's appeal to the Appeals Board was time-barred [...]. The decision impugned must accordingly be quashed." The case is referred back to the organization for a decision on the merits.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; decision quashed; further submissions on the merits; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; reply confined to receivability; time bar; tribunal;
Consideration 4
Extract:
If the time limit had expired, "the Director-General could indeed have refused to consider the complainant's protest. However, the ruling given [...] on his instructions makes no reference to the expiry of the time limit. Failure to observe a time limit laid down by the [applicable provision] is not [a flaw] which can be pleaded at a later stage in the procedure."
Keywords:
flaw; internal appeal; mistaken hearing of merits; procedural flaw; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The date on which the appeal is despatched is the important one. "[I]n laying down that staff members must submit their appeal in writing to the [competent body] within 15 or 30 days, [the applicable provision] implies that the important one is that on which the appeal is despatched."
Keywords:
date; internal appeal; interpretation; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 175
26th Session, 1971
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The Appeals Committee, without giving any precise opinion on the points raised by complainant, merely proposed that he should be paid compensation, purely ex gratia. Consequently, although the chairman of the Advisory Committee on Compensation Claims which examined the case before the Director-General's first decision then sat as a member of the Appeals Committee, "this irregularity is not, in the circumstances of the case, such as to taint with illegality the Director-General's [...] decision."
Keywords:
advisory body; composition of the internal appeals body; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; lack of injury; procedural flaw;
Judgment 165
25th Session, 1970
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
When first appointed in March 1952, the complainant was not enrolled in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. Although this decision was not at the time notified, it was confirmed and notified by the letter of January 1957 which informed the complainant that he would become a member of the pension fund from the following month. The date of receipt of that letter was the date at which the statutory period began to run for the lodging of an appeal. Filed in November 1968, the appeal was time-barred and the dismissing of the appeal was not tainted with illegality.
Keywords:
date of notification; decision; forfeiture of benefit; internal appeal; participation; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit; unjspf;
Judgment 164
25th Session, 1970
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
When first appointed in May 1951, the complainant was not enrolled in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. Although this decision was not at the time notified, it was confirmed and notified by the letter of January 1957 which informed the complainant that he would become a member of the pension fund from the following month. The date of receipt of that letter was the date at which the statutory period began to run for the lodging of an appeal. Filed in November 1968, the appeal was time-barred and the dismissing of the appeal was not tainted with illegality.
Keywords:
date of notification; decision; forfeiture of benefit; internal appeal; participation; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit; unjspf;
Judgment 158
24th Session, 1970
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The Headquarters appeals body found several irregularities in the procedure followed by the regional appeals body. These irregularities "do not affect the validity of the decision impugned which was taken by the Director-General on the completion of a regular form of procedure after exercising powers of investigation as broad as those of the Regional Director on the advice of a body which, like the Regional Board, had a joint composition.
Keywords:
field; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; lack of injury; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 149
23rd Session, 1970
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant deplores delays in the internal procedure. "The sanction for the violation of [the provision on internal appeals] is contained in that rule itself: an official who receives no reply to his complaint before the prescribed deadline is entitled to appeal [...] the complainant exercised that right and therefore suffered no injury." The material delays are no proof of prejudice.
Keywords:
administrative delay; flaw; internal appeal; lack of injury; procedure before the tribunal;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The applicable provision "is specific that a staff member can only designate another staff member to represent him before the committee. It follows that any advice sought from some outside source must be paid for by the staff member himself."
Keywords:
complainant; counsel; internal appeal; internal appeals body; refund;
Judgment 147
23rd Session, 1970
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
Although a provision of the Staff Rules allows the Appeals Board "in exceptional cases [to] waive the time-limit, the fact [...] that [the complainant], as a result of a mistake committed in good faith, addressed himself directly to the Administrative Tribunal, was not regarded by the [...] Appeals Board as an exceptional circumstance covered by the above-mentioned provision."
Keywords:
direct appeal to tribunal; exception; good faith; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 133
21st Session, 1969
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant objects to the organization's failure to disclose certain documents until after the internal appeals procedure was under way. "It has not been established that either of these documents in any way influenced the decision to terminate the complainant's appointment. The alleged delay in producing them did not therefore constitute a violation of his right to be heard."
Keywords:
administrative delay; disclosure of evidence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; lack of injury; organisation; right to reply;
Judgment 114
18th Session, 1967
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant failed to appeal against the impugned decision to the internal appeals body, contrary to statutory procedure. He has not therefore "exhausted the means at his disposition, under the applicable staff regulations. Accordingly his complaint is irreceivable under Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Administrative Tribunal".
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complaint; formal requirements; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 108
17th Session, 1967
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The decision to terminate the complainant was notified to him by cable on 1 April and confirmed by letter of 10 April. On 6 April he "addressed a letter to the competent authority announcing his intention of appealing against his termination and asking for various particulars. This letter must be regarded as a protest against the administrative decision of the Director-General".
Keywords:
formal requirements; internal appeal;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The fact that the Director-General had not given a ruling in accordance with [the material provision] could be regarded as failure to take a decision on a claim, thus entitling complainant to have recourse to the Tribunal under Article VII, paragraph 3, of its Statute. [However] the complainant would have had to file his complaint with the Administrative Tribunal within the 90 days following the 60 days during which the Director-General failed to give a ruling on his claim [...]. [He] is obviously time-barred."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Once the complainant did not ask for a hearing within the [...] time limit provided for [under the material provision], the appeal which he later instituted [...] was not receivable [...]. Consequently [...] insofar as it sought to resist the Director-General's decision to accept the opinion of the Appeals Board recognising that it was irreceivable the complaint is unfounded and must be dismissed."
Keywords:
internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 92
16th Session, 1966
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The organization transmitted to the complainant the findings of the internal appeals body, to the exclusion of its reasons. "As a result of the production of the full report during the present proceedings the complainant has been able to rely on it to submit any arguments which she considered suitable to support her claim. It follows that, while the right to be heard was ignored, at the administrative proceedings stage, this did not in fact affect the sense of the decision complained of and [...] does not involve the quashing of that decision."
Keywords:
case pending; disclosure of evidence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; lack of injury; organisation; procedural flaw; report; right to reply; tribunal;
Judgment 69
12th Session, 1964
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Far from having been able normally to defend his interests before the Director-General, the complainant [...] was not invited to comment on the documents which were submitted without his knowledge. [...] Even if the appeals procedure was properly complied with, the previous infringement of the right to be heard was not thereby corrected, since the officer who took the first decision had based himself to a considerable extent on evaluations which the higher authority apparently accepted without checking them all personally."
Keywords:
internal appeal; procedural flaw; right to reply;
Judgment 63
11th Session, 1962
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Tribunal is competent to pass judgment on the irregularities allegedly committed by the Appeals Board only to the extent that they might, "particularly by reason of their gravity, have affected the Director-General's decision." This is not a case in point: there was a hearing of both parties; the allegations made by complainant are without substance or relevance.
Keywords:
consequence; decision; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; lack of injury; procedural flaw;
Judgment 54
9th Session, 1961
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Where, as in the present case, no specific decision is taken, either at the request of the person concerned or by the administration acting on its own initiative, specifying that the temporary employment contract of [an] official is not to be renewed, the period within which the official may appeal against the refusal to renew his contract is reckoned from the day on which the contract expires."
Keywords:
contract; date; fixed-term; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; notice; start of time limit; time limit;
< 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 | next >
|
