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 (6,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Application for interpretation
Total judgments found: 35

1, 2 | next >

  • Judgment 4092


    127th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant asks the Tribunal to order WHO to comply with the obligations imposed on it by Judgment 3871 and, in particular, to reinstate him with all legal consequences.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    [S]i l’Organisation estimait que le dispositif du jugement 3871 présentait quelque incertitude ou ambiguïté sur ce point, il lui appartenait de saisir le Tribunal d’un recours en interprétation dudit jugement, ce qu’elle s’est abstenue de faire.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3871

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 4077


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU applies for interpretation and review of Judgment 3928 alleging errors of fact, inter alia, and asserts that it is impossible to give effect to the Tribunal’s order to reinstate the complainant. The complainant applies for execution of Judgment 3928.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; reinstatement;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunal’s case law, ordinarily an application for interpretation can only concern the decision in a judgment and not the grounds therefor (see, for example, Judgment 3984, consideration 10, and the case law cited therein). The application for interpretation is, on the face of the record, irreceivable as it does not put in issue the terms of the orders made in the decision in Judgment 3928.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3928, 3984

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3989


    126th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The EPO has filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 3972.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3972

    Keywords:

    application filed by the organisation; application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3987


    126th Session, 2018
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3913.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3913

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; application for review;

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    In her pleas in the application for interpretation and review, the complainant acknowledges that ordinarily an application for interpretation must concern an interpretation of the decision and not the Tribunal’s reasons. Nothing is said in the pleas about the meaning of the decision requiring interpretation, nor does the complainant argue that this is one of those rare cases when the considerations can be considered as part of the interpretation of the decision. Accordingly nothing more need be said about the application for interpretation.

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3985


    126th Session, 2018
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants have filed an application for execution of Judgment 3883 and the ILO has filed an application for interpretation of that judgment.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3883

    Keywords:

    application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3984


    126th Session, 2018
    African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The ACP Group has filed an application for review and interpretation of Judgment 3845.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunal’s case law, ordinarily an application for interpretation can concern only the decision contained in a judgment and not to the grounds therefor. It is, however, accepted that such an application may additionally concern the grounds if the decision refers to them explicitly so that they are indirectly incorporated in the decision (see Judgments 2483, under 3, 3271, under 4, and 3564, under 1). [...]
    However, an application for interpretation is receivable only if the meaning of the judgment concerned is uncertain or ambiguous to such an extent that the judgment cannot be executed (see, for example, Judgments 1306, under 2, 3014, under 3, or the aforementioned Judgment 3271, under 4).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1306, 2483, 3014, 3271, 3271, 3564

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3845

    Keywords:

    application filed by the organisation; application for interpretation; application for review;



  • Judgment 3896


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 3785.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3785

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3895


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3694.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3694

    Keywords:

    application for execution; application for interpretation;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    With respect to the remaining requested clarifications, b) to e) [...], the Tribunal finds that they are not requests for interpretation of the judgment, but are instead essentially requests for advice. Specifically, the complainant asks about the lawfulness of the new norms and if their applicability to his appeal adheres to the principles of international civil service law. These requests for advice are beyond the Tribunal’s competence.

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; competence of tribunal;



  • Judgment 3822


    124th Session, 2017
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3507.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3507

    Keywords:

    application for execution; application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3821


    124th Session, 2017
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3491.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3491

    Keywords:

    application for execution; application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3820


    124th Session, 2017
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3490.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3490

    Keywords:

    application for execution; application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3731


    123rd Session, 2017
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3235.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3235

    Keywords:

    application for execution; application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3635


    122nd Session, 2016
    Centre for the Development of Enterprise
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants have filed applications for execution of Judgment 3238.

    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;



  • Judgment 3566


    121st Session, 2016
    Centre for the Development of Enterprise
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgment 3239.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "[T]he complainant, who has a duty to cooperate in good faith in the execution of the judgment in question, could not, as she did, refuse to provide the CDE with the information and supporting documents that she was asked to produce (see Judgment 2684, under 6).
    If she wished to challenge the validity of this request, she had only to lodge an application for interpretation of [the] Judgment [...] with the Tribunal, which she did not do either."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2684

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; execution of judgment; good faith;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "[I]f the CDE wished, despite the Registrar’s informal opinion that it had obtained on this matter, to continue in the belief that it was entitled to deduct the nine months of salary in question from the damages owed to the complainant, clearly it should have filed an application for interpretation [...] with the Tribunal, which it did not."

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal recalls that its judgments, which, according to Article VI of its Statute, are “final and without appeal” and which also have 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 interpretation; execution of judgment;



  • Judgment 3564


    121st Session, 2016
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The ILO filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 3157.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3157

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    An application for interpretation can only be filed for the purpose of clarifying the decision contained in a judgment or the grounds therefor if the decision refers to them explicitly, in which case they must be seen as part of the latter (see Judgment 2483, under 3).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2483

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 3394


    119th Session, 2015
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal considered that, by taking it upon itself to interpret Judgment 3119, WIPO breached its duty to execute that judgment fully and correctly.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The Tribunal’s judgments carry the authority of res judicata and must be executed by the parties as ruled. They may not be called into question except when an application for review is allowed. They may form the subject of an application for interpretation by the Tribunal only if one party considers that the ruling is deficient or insufficiently clear (see Judgment 1887, under 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1887

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; res judicata;



  • Judgment 3392


    118th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal summarily dismissed the applications for interpretation and for review.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; application for review; res judicata; summary procedure;

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The reference in the decision to the shielding of the successful candidate is not ambiguous; the Tribunal deliberately left it to the discretion of WHO as to how it should protect the candidate who had accepted the appointment in good faith. Moreover, the Tribunal notes that the complainant requests clarification of a part of the decision (i.e. the shielding of the successful candidate) that does not affect him directly. The Tribunal therefore sees no reason to interpret the judgment."

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3154


    114th Session, 2013
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The ITU applies for interpretation of paragraph 2 of the decision in Judgment 2958 concerning the definition of "gross salary" for the calculation of termination indemnity.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The ordinary meaning of 'gross salary' is the full amount of a staff member’s regular remuneration including allowances, overtime pay, commissions and bonuses, and any other amount usually paid, before any deductions are made. In context, the notion of 'gross salary' was chosen to indicate the base salary prior to the staff deduction, plus all allowances and benefits. This interpretation is consistent with the fact that the award of damages had to be the equivalent of reinstatement and that the express purpose was to compensate the complainant for the time he 'should have worked with the Union'."

    Keywords:

    amount; application for interpretation; compensation; gross salary; interpretation; judgment of the tribunal; material damages;



  • Judgment 3153


    114th Session, 2013
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant applies for interpretation and execution of Judgment 2861.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "As the complainant was not reinstated, her employment relationship with WMO ended on 3 November 2006 and with her separation from service, her right to participate in the UNJSPF ended (see Judgments 1338, 1797 and 1904). Further, as also stated in Judgment 2621 under 5, 'had it been its intent the Tribunal would have specifically ordered the payment of an amount equivalent to the pension fund contributions that would otherwise have been paid by the [organisation]'."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1338, 1797, 1904, 2621, 3061

    Keywords:

    application for execution; application for interpretation; case law; contributions; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; pension; reinstatement; unjspf;



  • Judgment 2806


    106th Session, 2009
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    In Judgment 2575, the Tribunal annulled a decision to transfer the complainant from Vienna to Berlin. No action was taken to return him to Vienna. Instead, on 13 February 2007, the IOM informed him that he was to be transferred to Berlin with immediate effect. In Judgment 2691, the Tribunal declared that the decision of 13 February 2007 was "null and void ab initio".
    "Like all judicial bodies, the Tribunal has inherent jurisdiction and power to take action to ensure that its judgments are implemented. That power may be exercised in any proceedings where a question is raised with respect to the implementation of a judgment. Accordingly, an order will be made for a penalty to be paid in the event that [the complainant] is not posted to Vienna within 30 days."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2575, 2691

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; application for review; continuing breach; delay; execution of judgment; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; judicial review; organisation's duties; res judicata; time limit;

1, 2 | next >


 
Last updated: 12.12.2018 ^ top