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

Waiver of internal appeal procedure (715,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Waiver of internal appeal procedure
Total judgments found: 2

  • Judgment 3732


    123rd Session, 2017
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss his allegations of harassment and abuse of authority as unfounded.

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunal’s case law, “the right to an internal appeal is a safeguard which international civil servants enjoy in addition to their right of appeal to a judicial authority (see, for example, [...] Judgments 2781, under 15, and 3067, under 20). This is especially true since internal appeal bodies may normally allow an appeal on grounds of fairness or advisability, whereas the Tribunal must essentially give a ruling on points of law. [...] [T]he review of a disputed decision in an internal appeal procedure may well suffice to resolve a dispute, one of the main justifications for the mandatory nature of such a procedure is to enable the Tribunal, in the event that a complaint is ultimately lodged, to have before it the findings of fact, items of information or assessment resulting from the deliberations of appeal bodies, especially those whose membership includes representatives of both staff and management, as is often the case (see, for example, Judgments 1141, under 17, or 2811, under 11). [...] [T]he Appeal Board plays a fundamental role in the resolution of disputes, owing to the guarantees of objectivity derived from its composition, its extensive knowledge of the functioning of the organisation and the broad investigative powers granted to it. By conducting hearings and investigative measures, it gathers the evidence and testimonies that are necessary in order to establish the facts, as well as the data needed for an informed assessment thereof.” (See Judgment 3424, considerations 11(a) and (b).) Therefore, considering the administrative, quasi-judicial nature of the internal appeal, both parties (staff and Administration) must be in agreement in order to bypass the internal appeal procedure, which is a fundamental element of the conflict resolution system of an international organization, and come directly before the Tribunal.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1141, 2781, 2811, 3067, 3424

    Keywords:

    waiver of internal appeal procedure;



  • Judgment 3267


    116th Session, 2014
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugned the decision not to waive the time limit for lodging an internal appeal, claiming that his heavy workload constituted an exceptional circumstance justifying the grant of a waiver.

    Considerations 3 and 4

    Extract:

    "It was not in issue that under Staff Rule 11.1.1(b)(3) the discretionary power to waive the time limits can be exercised in exceptional circumstances. That is what the rule said. In its reasons, the Board pointed to the need for certainty that is created by time limits but noted the discretion to waive them in exceptional circumstances. It did not consider there were such circumstances and that the complainant’s workload would not have prevented him from bringing his appeal in time, though it accepted that may have contributed to him overlooking the time limits.
    This reasoning is quite unexceptionable. The complainant argued the reasoning contained a “contradiction”. He pointed to the Board’s acknowledgement in its reasons that the complainant’s heavy workload may possibly have been a contributing factor in the complainant overlooking the deadline. However the substance of what the Board was saying was that it was not satisfied the circumstances were exceptional. It needed to be positively satisfied that they were before it could exercise the discretionary power to waive the time limits. There has been no miscarriage of the exercise of the discretionary power. The Board was not obliged, as the complainant submitted, to involve the Administration and it had power, under Staff Rule 11.1.1(e)(3)(b), to summarily dismiss the appeal as clearly irreceivable. It did so. The complaint to the Tribunal should be dismissed."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Rule 11.1.1(b)(3)

    Keywords:

    discretion; exception; internal appeal; time limit; waiver of internal appeal procedure;


 
Last updated: 12.08.2019 ^ top