Judgment No. 663
Decision
THE COMPLAINTS ARE DISMISSED.
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Before the Tribunal will join complaints and deal with them in a single judgment two conditions must be fulfilled. The first is that the substance of the claims must be the same. Whether they are stated differently is of no account: what matters is that the Tribunal should be able to rule on them in a single decision. The second condition is that the material facts, viz. those on which the claims rest and which are relevant thereto, should be the same. The complaints need not all contain the same arguments and rest on the same legal reasoning. The Tribunal rules as it sees fit and is not constrained by the parties' submissions."
Keywords
joinder; identical claims; identical facts; application of law ex officio; condition
Consideration 4
Extract:
By virtue of Article VII[1], "the Tribunal will declare irreceivable a complaint impugning a general decision against which there can be no direct internal appeal, but which must ordinarily be followed by individual decisions against which such appeal does lie. There are two reasons for so construing Article VII. The first is that the Tribunal is relieved of ruling on the validity of a general decision to which it may be unable to foresee exactly how effect will be given. The second is that the Tribunal will not be acting on an application from a single complainant to set aside a general decision which other staff may not object to."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords
general decision; receivability of the complaint
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Although there are some differences between the four complaints, which impugn different decisions and put forward not quite identical claims, the decisions do form a single pattern of which each complaint challenges different elements, all four being closely and indeed inextricably linked by an identity of substance. They all raise the same preliminary issue, and one on which the Tribunal may give a single ruling, namely the receivability of a complaint challenging a general decision by the Council."
Keywords
claim; joinder; difference
Consideration 4
Extract:
The impugned decision is a general one. "Before coming before the Tribunal the complainant must wait until the administration has taken individual decisions concerning him and he has exhausted the internal means of redress. To declare his complaints irreceivable causes him no prejudice since he may appeal against future individual decisions, first inside the organisation, and then, if necessary to the Tribunal."
Keywords
general decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint; internal remedies exhausted
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The mere fact that the impugned decision affects several categories of staff and is therefore general in character is not in itself sufficient to make the complaints irreceivable. Decisions which may be challenged before the Tribunal do not have to be individual in nature. That they may also be general is plain from Article VII[2] of the Statute of the Tribunal".
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords
general decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint; competence of tribunal
| 
