ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword > application for interpretation

Judgment No. 3635

Decision

1. The case is remitted to the CDE in order that it execute Judgment 3238 in full by paying the complainants the outstanding amounts due to them in settlement of the equivalent of the social security contributions to which reference is made in consideration 20 of that judgment, together with the applicable interest.
2. The CDE shall pay each complainant moral damages in the amount of 3,000 euros.
3. The CDE shall also pay each complainant 2,000 euros in costs.
4. If the CDE does not settle the full amount of the awards referred to in points 1 to 3, above, within 30 days of the public delivery of this judgment, it shall pay each complainant a penalty of 3,000 euros per month of delay.
5. All other claims are dismissed, as is the CDE’s counterclaim.

Summary

The complainants have filed applications for execution of Judgment 3238.

Judgment keywords

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3238

Keywords

application for execution; joinder

Consideration 4

Extract:

The Tribunal recalls that its judgments, which according to Article VI of its Statute are “final and without appeal” and which also carry res judicata authority, are immediately operative (see, for example, Judgments 3003, under 12, and 3152, under 11). As they may not later be called into question except when an application for review is allowed, they must be executed by the parties as ruled. They may form the subject of an application for interpretation by the Tribunal only if a party considers that the decision is deficient or insufficiently clear (see, for example, Judgments 1887, under 8, and 3394, under 9).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1887, 3003, 3152, 3394

Keywords

application for execution; application for interpretation

Consideration 6

Extract:

It is clear from the wording of that consideration [...] that the sums equivalent to the various social contributions listed therein were to be paid directly to the complainants, and not to the institutions which normally receive such contributions. Indeed, this is the approach usually taken by the Tribunal where, as in the present case, staff members whose dismissal has been set aside are not reinstated in the employer organisation, because the social contributions that are due to such institutions by virtue of an employment relationship are devoid of any basis once this relationship ends.

Keywords

application for execution; social benefit; material damages

Consideration 9

Extract:

It must [...] be underscored that, contrary to the CDE’s apparently mistaken belief, the Centre was not ordered in Judgment 3238 to pay social security contributions but, as consideration 20 states, “the equivalent” of those contributions, which is not to be confused with the latter and is entirely different from a legal standpoint. This sum is in fact an integral part of the lump-sum damages mentioned above. It must further be recalled that one of the justifications for this award was the legitimate desire to remedy the financial loss that the complainants would suffer if they enrolled in a private social insurance scheme at their own expense after their dismissal, for which the payment of contributions to the NSSO does not compensate in any way.

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3238

Keywords

damages

Consideration 12

Extract:

International organisations that have recognised the Tribunal’s jurisdiction are bound to take whatever action a judgment may require and, in particular, should the Tribunal order payment of a sum of money, to effect this payment without delay (see, inter alia, Judgment 82, under 5, the aforementioned Judgment 3152, under 11, and Judgment 3566, under 17). It would be a serious breach of the CDE’s obligations if the execution of such an order were rendered contingent on the availability of the requisite budgetary appropriations, should no due provision have been made for them beforehand, or on the Executive Board’s approval, with the inevitable corollary that, should these conditions not be met, CDE would consider itself released from this obligation, or authorised simply to delay the performance thereof until such time as they were met.

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 82, 3152, 3566

Keywords

application for execution

Consideration 15

Extract:

In light of the lack of speed which the CDE has displayed so far in dealing with this case, it is appropriate to order it to pay each complainant a penalty of 3,000 euros per month of delay if it does not honour its obligations in full within 30 days of the delivery in public of this judgment.

Keywords

penalty for delay



 
Last updated: 27.03.2017 ^ top