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: 40

1, 2 | next >

  • Judgment 4187


    128th Session, 2019
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 4052.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The application for interpretation is irreceivable. According to the Tribunal’s established case law, “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 [...] 3271, under 4)” (see Judgment 3984, under 10).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1306, 3014, 3271, 3984

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The complainant’s request for clarification under (a) in consideration 3 [...] is an attempt to relitigate a question which was already decided in Judgment 4052 and which is therefore res judicata.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4052

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; res judicata;



  • Judgment 4179


    128th Session, 2019
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 3879.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunal’s case law, an application for the interpretation of any aspect of a judgment will not be receivable where the judgment is clear and unambiguous and the application is merely filed “to obtain an opinion on a legal issue, to obtain a reply from the Tribunal to a question that it was not required to address in the context of the judgment to which the application relates, or to circumvent an internal procedure in which disputes regarding the execution of the judgment could be resolved in accordance with the adversarial principle” (see, for example, Judgment 3014, under 3).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3014

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    Point 2 [of the decision] would not be ambiguous merely because the parties subjectively may not agree on its meaning or effect, as the complainant suggests. Objectively, point 2 of the decision in Judgment 3879 is clear and unambiguous. It means that, the Tribunal having set aside the complainant’s 2011 PACE appraisal report and ordered its removal from his file, it is not to be taken into account as a valid PACE appraisal report affecting any decisions or actions concerning the complainant.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3879

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • 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:

    [I]f WHO considered that the decision in Judgment 3871 presented any uncertainty or ambiguity on this point, it ought to have filed with the Tribunal an application for interpretation of the judgment, but it did not do this.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3871

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation;



  • Judgment 4079


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3930 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

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

    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).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3984

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; receivability of application;



  • Judgment 4078


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3929 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; fixed-term; termination;

    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 3929.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3929, 3984

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; receivability of application;



  • 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 4076


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU filed and application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3927 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.

    Consideration 8

    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 3927.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3927, 3984

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; receivability of application;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; disciplinary procedure; suspension;



  • 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;

1, 2 | next >


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top