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

Judgment No. 649

Decision

THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

Consideration 9

Extract:

"What [the Organisation] is really saying is that the Tribunal misapplied the rules, and an allegation of a mistake of law does not constitute admissible grounds for review since it is an attack on the principle of res judicata."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 564, 565, 614

Keywords

application for review; mistake of law

Consideration 8

Extract:

"a request for review must be addressed to the maker of the challenged decision. in this case, the complainant asked the reports board to reconsider its [previous] comments [...] and that was tantamount to challenging the director-general's decision [...] his challenge was misconceived in law and could not impair the finality of the decision."

Keywords

competence; internal appeal; decision-maker

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

application for review; admissible grounds for review; res judicata; exception; judgment of the tribunal; condition; misinterpretation of the facts

Consideration 5

Extract:

the complainant invites the tribunal to order the immediate execution of the judgment in question. the organisation pleads that the claim is irreceivable on the grounds that the complainant has failed to exhaust the internal means of redress. "this plea is unsound. failure to execute a judgment does not constitute breach of the staff regulations or of the contract of employment or unjustifiable or unfair treatment and therefore cannot come under [the staff regulations]. what the complainant is asking for is neither more nor less than execution of a decision by the tribunal on a matter within its competence, and the tribunal may determine whether due effect has been given to that decision."

Keywords

application for execution; claim; receivability of the complaint; internal remedies exhausted; competence of tribunal; judgment of the tribunal; execution of judgment

Consideration 7

Extract:

in this case, "the board's further comments and the director-general's further approval did not alter a whit the previous comments and decision. being mere confirmation, they set off no new time limit for filing a complaint. the complaint is irreceivable because" the time limit for filing it had expired.

Keywords

confirmatory decision; receivability of the complaint; internal appeal; time limit; new time limit; time bar

Consideration 4

Extract:

"the plea fails since the [new] facts are subsequent to the date of [the judgment] and therefore cannot have an effect on that decision."

Keywords

subsequent fact; judgment of the tribunal; consequence

Consideration 4

Extract:

"The complainant is alleging misinterpretation of a statement by a supervisor. That would amount to misappraisal of evidence, and the plea is inadmissible."

Keywords

appraisal of facts; receivability of the complaint; misinterpretation of the facts

Consideration 11

Extract:

the claims in question "amount to a demand that the ilo stop acting in breach of its obligations under the staff regulations. the formulation of the obligations is so vague and general that their performance cannot be subject to judicial review. the claims are irreceivable."

Keywords

vague claim; receivability of the complaint; organisation's duties



 
Last updated: 29.08.2017 ^ top