Judgment No. 3418
1. WIPO shall pay the complainant 15,000 Swiss francs by way of moral damages.
2. WIPO shall pay the complainant 7,000 Swiss francs for legal costs.
3. All other claims are dismissed.
The Tribunal recognized the moral injury caused to the complainant and determined the amount of compensation.
complaint allowed; post classification; grade
"Before addressing the issues raised by the complainant in her brief, it is necessary to address a challenge by WIPO to the receivability of the complaint. [...] WIPO contends that the complaint is not receivable. It does so on a basis that is raised in other cases in this session and which has been raised in the past. The Tribunal’s response to the argument has been consistent. While the completed complaint form was filed on 13 April 2012, the brief was not filed until 17 July 2012. This occurred in circumstances where the Registrar exercised a power to enable the complainant to “correct” the complaint under Article 6(2) of the Tribunal’s Rules. Article 14 of the Rules also appears to have been engaged. WIPO argues that this is an impermissible use of the power conferred on the Registrar by Article 6 and, in the result, the completed complaint (complaint form and brief) was filed out of time. However, the exercise of the power conferred by Article 6(2) in similar circumstances has been sanctioned by the Tribunal’s jurisprudence (see Judgment 1500, considerations 1 and 2). Whether it is desirable for a Registrar to routinely use the power in this way is another question. WIPO’s challenge to receivability is rejected."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1500
receivability of the complaint; correction of complaint; late filing
"The complainant, through her counsel, has called in aid not only these findings and recommendations but also the recommendations of the Appeal Board in a separate report [...] a basis for the calculation of damages in these proceedings. This is impermissible. The complainant has elected, presumably advised to do so by her legal adviser, to commence and prosecute several internal appeals. Whether this was desirable or necessary, is not a matter on which the Tribunal should comment. However, in assessing damages, the Tribunal should, in a case such as the present, focus on the subject matter of the complaint informed by the scope of the internal appeal."
"The complainant requested an oral hearing. However the Tribunal is satisfied that the issues raised in the proceedings can be resolved having regard to the pleas and the documentary evidence. A request was made for the production of documents. The request was cast in the most general and imprecise terms and should be rejected."
disclosure of evidence