Judgment No. 1522
The application is dismissed.
"That he set out his pleas in a brief entered several months [after filing his complaint] after due extension of the time limit granted for the purpose, has no bearing on receivability. As was held in Judgment 1305 [...] under 16 - to which the Tribunal draws the organization's attention - the Registrar may as such take any action he sees fit to safeguard due process."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1305
procedure before the tribunal; complaint; receivability of the complaint; formal requirements; tribunal; correction of complaint; new time limit; submissions; case law; iloat statute
The organization has "discharged its duty to take an express decision duly giving its reasons for not reinstating him. Its decision [not to reinstate him] takes seriatim all the posts he might have been appointed to. It explains the reasons of fact or law why it came to the view that his training, experience or grasp of languages or the need for special skills disqualified him for some posts. The reasons why he was not appointed to others had to do with the budget, some posts being 'frozen'. Or else the reasons were administrative: for example the Appointment and Promotion Board was not in favour, or the organization gave priority to a permanent employee."
application for execution; duty to substantiate decision; judgment of the tribunal; due process; organisation's duties; professional experience; promotion board; selection board; qualifications; knowledge of languages; training; reinstatement; duration of appointment; permanent appointment; budgetary reasons; priority; judicial review; advisory opinion; refusal