Judgment No. 2439

• Organization: Universal Postal Union (UPU)
• Date: 06.07.2005
• Original: Français
• Judges: Gentot, Ba, Rouiller
• Full judgment text (anglais) - Texte intégral du jugement

Decision

The complaint and the UPU's counterclaim are dismissed.

Consideration 4

Extract:

"The UPU contends that the complaint is irreceivable on the grounds that within the time provided for under Article VII(2) of the Statute of the Tribunal, the complainant merely filed his complaint form [...] without appending the brief referred to in Article 6(1)(b) of the Rules of the Tribunal. [...] It may be recalled [...] that the possibility of correcting a complaint which does not comply with the formal requirements of Article 6(1) of the Rules is given to international civil servants as a means of protecting them against the strict implications of a procedure with which they are not necessarily familiar."

Reference(s)

ILOAT reference: Article VII(2) of the Statute and Article 6(1) of the Rules

Keywords

procedure before the tribunal; complaint; receivability of the complaint; formal requirements; time limit; correction of complaint; iloat statute

Consideration 7

Extract:

Rather than argue that the Scheme’s bodies applied the relevant provisions of the Regulations incorrectly, the complainant challenges the procedure defined in those provisions. He is at liberty to do so. While general provisions may not be contested at the time of their adoption, their lawfulness may be challenged by a staff member through an appeal against a decision applying those provisions which actually causes present damage to his personal interests (see Judgment 2379, under 5).

Reference(s)

Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2379

Keywords

provision; flaw