Res judicata (94, 95, 96, 97,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Res judicata
Total judgments found: 154
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
Judgment 1119
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
See Judgment 1121, summary.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1012, 1118, 1123
Keywords:
adjustment; reduction of salary; res judicata; salary;
Judgment 1068
70th Session, 1991
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4, Summary
Extract:
The complainant received a termination indemnity under Article 11.6 of the ILO Staff Regulations (indemnity upon reduction of staff). She claims a more generous one under Article 11.16 (agreed termination). The indemnity under dispute was mentioned in an agreement signed in 1977, which the Tribunal recognised as valid in Judgment 404 of 24 April 1980. Besides, her entitlements were paid in full on 24 January 1979. Her claim of 20 December 1988 is therefore time- barred under Article 14.8 and also irreceivable under the res judicata rule.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLES 11.6 AND 11.16 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
agreed termination; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; terminal entitlements; time bar;
Judgment 1060
70th Session, 1991
African Training and Research Centre in Administration for Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant has four pleas in support of his application for review of Judgment 1003: a material error, his discovery of new facts, the disregard of particular facts and failure to rule on his claims. Consideration of his pleas led the Tribunal to conclude that his application was an idle attempt at challenging a ruling that has the authority of res judicata.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1003
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; res judicata;
Judgment 986
67th Session, 1989
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
On 1 April 1987 the ILO brought in a new scale which further lowered pensionable remuneration. Though there is no going back on what was said in earlier judgments, "the complainants may back up their case against the decisions they impugn by citing the earlier ones on the same subject [vide Judgments 832 and 862]. The full set of decisions is material in ruling on the plea of breach of acquired rights even though, if breach there has been, the consequences will touch only the decisions now under challenge."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 832, 862
Keywords:
acquired right; consequence; cumulative decisions; pension; pensionable remuneration; reduction of salary; res judicata; scale;
Judgment 980
66th Session, 1989
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The Tribunal's judgments carry the authority of res judicata and it will review them only in exceptional cases. It will not review on the grounds of an alleged mistake of law or misappraisal of the facts or because it had failed to comment on all the pleas submitted by the parties. A review may be permitted where there was an omission of fact involving no exercise of judgment - as distinct from a mistaken appraisal of the facts - an omission to rule on a claim or the discovery of a 'new' fact which the complainant discovered too late to cite in the original proceedings."
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; inadmissible grounds for review; res judicata;
Judgment 960
66th Session, 1989
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
As to res judicata, "a judgment that dismisses a complaint has only relative force in that it is binding only on those who are parties to the case."
Keywords:
effect; judgment of the tribunal; res judicata;
Judgment 950
65th Session, 1988
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"To justify review, there must be evidence of some exceptional circumstance, such as accident or inadvertence, cogent enough to displace the principle of finality of judgment."
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; exception; res judicata;
Judgment 934
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant invites the Tribunal to declare the two reprimands imposed on him void ab initio. The claim to have the first declared void is res judicata, the Tribunal having already dismissed it in its Judgment no. 801 because the decision had been previously withdrawn. As the second reprimand has also been withdrawn, the Tribunal dismisses the claim to have it declared void as well.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 801
Keywords:
application for quashing; cause of action; censure; no cause of action; res judicata; settlement out of court;
Judgment 898
64th Session, 1988
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The claims are irreceivable because "they are a pointless attempt to get review of decisions that the Tribunal ruled on in Judgments 732 and 733. [...] [The complainant is] pleading misinterpretation of the text, and that would be a mistake of law, which is not an admissible reason for reviewing a text that carries the authority of res judicata."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 732, 733
Keywords:
application for review; interpretation; mistake of law; res judicata; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 886
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"Since the rights Mr. B. is relying on in his application [to intervene] were ruled on once and for all in Judgment 855, the res judicata rule bars him from raising the same issues again by other means and his application is therefore irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 855
Keywords:
intervention; receivability of the complaint; res judicata;
Judgment 879
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 13-14
Extract:
"The res judicata rule applies to an intervener because by the very act of intervening he espouses the complainant's case. It is true that there are some arguments which he puts forward again and which those judgments did not address. But that does not mean that the conditions [...] for applying the res judicata rule are not met: between this case and the earlier ones there is identity in the parties, in the purpose of the suit and in the cause of action."
Keywords:
consequence; effect; intervention; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose;
Judgment 862
63rd Session, 1987
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
Article 3.1.1.2 of the ILO Staff Regulations provides for periodic adjustments to pensionable remuneration. The application of this regulation was suspended effective 1 April 1985. The complainants argue that the absence of an adjustment on 1 April 1986 breaches their acquired rights. "The complainants say they cannot put a figure on the loss sustained but they submit a table showing losses that range from 13 to 39 per cent according to grade. The table does not distinguish between loss due to the measures of which the Tribunal was informed in the earlier proceedings - and which it declared lawful - and loss alleged to be due to the failure to revise the scale on 1 April 1986. So in any event the Tribunal cannot but endorse its ruling in Judgment 832 under 16." The complaints are dismissed.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 3.1.1.2 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS
ILOAT Judgment(s): 832
Keywords:
acquired right; adjustment; amount; breach; date; difference; enforcement; grade; injury; pension; pension entitlements; pensionable remuneration; provision; reckoning; res judicata; staff regulations and rules; subsidiary; suspensive action;
Judgment 860
63rd Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"Intervening in a complaint that was already pending, [the complainant in the present case] threw in his lot with Mr [S.]'s and espoused the case as it stood at the date of his application. He did become a party to that case and so for him Judgment 657 does carry the authority of res judicata."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 657
Keywords:
consequence; effect; intervention; res judicata; same parties;
Summary
Extract:
As to identity in the cause of action, Mr [A.] notes that the Tribunal had in part rejected the complainants' plea of breach of good faith on the grounds that they had taken up duty after the new criteria had taken effect. Mr [A.] contends that this reasoning does not apply to him insofar as he had taken up duty before the change in rules. The Tribunal acknowledges that there is on this point a new cause of action; however it holds on the merits that a staff member has no right, save in exceptional cases, to demand that the rules on promotion in force at the time of appointment should never be modified.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 657
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; application for review; appointment; date; effective date; general principle; good faith; practice; promotion; provision; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; terms of appointment;
Judgment 812
61st Session, 1987
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Identity in the cause of action relates to the foundation of the claim in law. The cause of action is not the same thing as the pleas, which are submissions on issues of law or of a fact put forward in support of the claim."
Keywords:
res judicata; same cause of action;
Judgment 785
60th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"A complainant may not eschew the res judicata rule by just prompting a new decision and saying it is not the same as the one he challenged earlier. The criterion is not the substance of the decision but the complainant's true intentions"
Keywords:
decision; purpose; res judicata;
Judgment 725
58th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The general rule is that identical claims may not be submitted to two different bodies. At the date of filing these claims were before the internal appeals body and they are therefore irreceivable. Nor may the same claims be twice submitted to the same instance.
Keywords:
identical claims; parallel proceedings; receivability of the complaint; res judicata;
Judgment 706
57th Session, 1985
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The Tribunal's judgments have the authority of res judicata. An international organisation which has recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction is therefore bound not merely to refrain from acting in disregard of a judgment, but first and foremost to take whatever action the judgment may require. The judgment must be both respected and executed."
Keywords:
consequence; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; res judicata;
Judgment 649
55th Session, 1985
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"A judgment carries the force of res judicata from the date on which it is handed down. Though it is subject to review thereafter, the Tribunal will review it only in exceptional circumstances. Some pleas in support of an application for review, such as misappraisal of evidence, are inadmissible. Others, such as material error or the discovery of new facts, are not; but for the application to succeed they must be such as to affect the decision."
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; condition; exception; judgment of the tribunal; misinterpretation of the facts; res judicata;
Judgment 610
53rd Session, 1984
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"As [the Tribunal] has said many times, it will review a judgment only in quite exceptional circumstances: not only are the admissible pleas for review severely limited but what is required is the finding of an exceptional fact, such as an oversight or some fortuitous circumstance, warranting derogation from the general rule of res judicata in Article VI of the Statute of the Tribunal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VI OFTHE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 446
Keywords:
application for review; exception; res judicata;
Judgment 604
52nd Session, 1984
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant invites the Tribunal to correct the material error in Judgments nos. 404, 442 and 536. The Tribunal recalls that a complainant may not submit the same pleas for review more than once. It first seeks to determine whether Judgment no. 536 suffers from any defects which would cause it to be set aside and which could then require the other judgments to be reconsidered. The Tribunal finds that Judgment no. 536 does not overlook the complainant's claims, contrary to her allegations, and is therefore not admissible for review. The complainant's criticism of the Tribunal's appraisal of the claims and certain facts in the case serves no purpose and is not an admissible ground for review.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404, 442, 536
Keywords:
application for review; material error; res judicata;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
|
