Judgment No. 3434
The complaint is dismissed.
The Tribunal found that the EPO had correctly concluded that the complainant was not entitled to the reimbursement he claimed for the school fees of his children.
[I]t is observed that the submissions that are contained in the brief supporting the complaint refer in part to explanations and submissions which were provided in other documents. On previous occasions, the Tribunal drew attention to Article 6(1)(b) of the Rules of the Tribunal, which states that arguments of fact and law must appear in the complaint itself, supplemented in the rejoinder if necessary. It was stated in Judgment 2264, under 3(e), for example, that those arguments may not consist of a mere reference to other documents, as that would be contrary to the Rules and would render it difficult for the other party to clearly understand the complainant’s pleas. Such references are acceptable only as illustrations. This is particularly so where, as in the present case, the annexes are bulky but are not helpfully demarcated to facilitate identification.
ILOAT reference: Article 6(1)(b) of the Rules
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2264
complaint; omission to rule on a plea; receivability of the complaint; judicial review
The Tribunal has consistently stated that the staff regulations and staff rules of an international organisation are to be interpreted without resort to international instruments. Such instruments bind State Parties.
international instrument; interpretation