Receivability of the complaint (76, 77, 78, 947, 88, 89, 656, 743, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 734, 748, 749,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Receivability of the complaint
Total judgments found: 735
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 | next >
Judgment 1521
81st Session, 1996
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The WTO has applied for interpretation of Judgment 1407. It wants to know, in particular, whether that judgment prevents application to the complainant of one of its circulars. The Tribunal holds that [the judgment in question] is "quite clear and leaves no room for interpretation [...] what the organization really wants is that the Tribunal say whether the circular is lawful. That being so, its application is clearly irreceivable and must be dismissed under the summary procedure in Article 7 of its Rules."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 7 OF THE RULES
Keywords:
application for interpretation; judgment of the tribunal; organisation; receivability of the complaint; summary procedure;
Judgment 1520
81st Session, 1996
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Organization objects "that the complainants are just acting as a front for the Staff Association and fall foul of the precedents that declare complaints by such associations to be irreceivable: see for example Judgment 911. [The Tribunal finds that] the complainants have filed complaints in their own name and are quite free to claim rights as officials of the WTO by the means at their disposal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 911
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff representative; staff union;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The general decisions which the Assembly and Executive Council of the WTO took and which came into effect as announced in the circular affect the complainants' right to legal status in line with the common system, particularly as to the amounts of end-of-service entitlements, notice of dismissal and the general rules on retirement pensions. None of those provisions - some of which have indeed been dropped - directly infringes any of the rights that the complainants are asserting. They may, if they so wish, properly challenge any individual decision that applies to the provisions. Insofar as they are challenging the circular their complaints are therefore irreceivable."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; cause of action; coordinated organisations; general decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint; rule of another organisation; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainants are challenging a "decision refusing their claim to a promise from the Organization to preserve the rights they had under the old Staff Regulations and Rules. Any decisions that may be taken to give effect to the general rules will be challengeable provided that there is some actual dispute for the Tribunal to rule on. Here there is none. The complainants cite no individual decision that causes them injury. They may not contrive such dispute by seeking promises from the Organization."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; cause of action; complaint; general decision; individual decision; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1519
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The organization "objects that [one of] the complainants' [pleas] is irreceivable because they did not put it forward in support of their original claim. The objection is mistaken: receivability depends on the making of prior claims, not of prior pleas. [...] They may enter whatever pleas they like, including any they did not make in support of their internal appeal."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; internal appeal; new claim; new plea; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1516
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-8
Extract:
"The organization is [...] wrong to argue that [the complainant] has never sought reconsideration [...] of the decision setting the degree of her invalidity [...] and so has no adverse decision to impugn on that score." "It is true that as worded her original claims were not about the degree of her invalidity [...] but there is much evidence to show that the competent units of the organization did realise she was seeking review on medical grounds" "both the complainant and senior officers believed that review was on the way. [...] So it is odd to find the defendant now arguing that she had to get an express decision before seeking review".
Keywords:
complaint; good faith; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1510
81st Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"An international civil servant may not ordinarily impugn a general rule that does not affect himself. Yet he may challenge any individual decision that does him injury; in so doing he may support his claims with any plea he likes; and he may thus plead breach of some general principle or of a written rule or clause of his contract that constitutes a term of appointment." The complainants are "just as free to plead flaws in the material rules as any mistakes of law or fact in assessing the peculiarities of their own position."
Keywords:
breach; cause of action; complaint; contract; general decision; general principle; individual decision; receivability of the complaint; terms of appointment;
Judgment 1506
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-9
Extract:
"The Organization objects that the complaint is irreceivable on the grounds that the decision impugned is not a final one: the complainant has, it pleads, failed to exhaust the internal means of redress because he did not appeal to the Joint Appeals Board [...] The plea is upheld [...] The conclusion is that the complaint is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute".
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1500
80th Session, 1996
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant filed within the time limit in the Statute the complaint form provided for in the Schedule to the Rules. The entries sufficed to identify the decision he was impugning and the relief he was claiming. The registering of the complaint and the correcting of it within the time limit were in line with the Rules. Since the complaint was lodged in time the Organization's objection to receivability fails."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; correction of complaint; decision; formal requirements; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Article VII(2) of the Tribunal's Statute says that a complaint must be filed within ninety days after the complainant had notice of the impugned decision; Article 6(1) of the Rules sets out the requirements of form; and 6(2) says that if not satisfied that the complaint meets those requirements the registrar shall call upon the complainant to correct it within thirty days. The Rules do not say that all the formal requirements must be met by the date of filing."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 6(1) AND 6(2) OF THE RULES
Keywords:
complaint; correction of complaint; date; date of notification; decision; formal requirements; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1491
80th Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The Director-General granted the complainants leave not to appeal to the Joint Advisory Appeals Board and they have come straight to the Tribunal. Their complaints are therefore receivable."
Keywords:
acceptance; complaint; condition; direct appeal to tribunal; executive head; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1490
80th Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"The complainant is trying to [...] challenge the decisions [...] that have become final. In the absence of any new fact he may not challenge mere confirmation of those decisions."
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1486
80th Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"It is true that Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute requires a complainant, before he files suit with the Tribunal, not just to apply for internal review but also to await the outcome of the internal proceedings. Yet that is not a hard-and-fast rule, even though the Statute does not allow any express derogation. If a complainant does his utmost to procure a decision, and if nevertheless the internal appeals body evinces by its statements or conduct an intention not to report within a reasonable time, justice requires that an exception be made. A mere failure to proceed with all proper speed and diligence is not enough: it is only if the proceedings have been so protracted that the delay is inordinate, unexplained and inexcusable that such an intention will be inferred: see Judgments 408 [...] and 451 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VII(1) of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 408, 451
Keywords:
administrative delay; case law; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The complainant had done everything in his power to exhaust his internal remedies and [at a certain date] it was quite clear that the internal process of review would not be concluded within a time which the Tribunal may regard as reasonable in the circumstances. [...] The complaint is therefore receivable."
Keywords:
administrative delay; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1469
80th Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"To satisfy the requirement in Article VII(1) the complainant must not only follow the prescribed internal procedure for appeal, but follow it properly and in particular observe any time limit that may be set for the purpose for internal procedures."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; delay; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1464
80th Session, 1996
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"The complainant contends that her complaint is receivable because she may act under Article VII(3), the organization having failed to take its decision on her appeal within the sixty days' time limit set in that provision. But her reading of VII(3) is mistaken. It does not require that the process of appeal be completed within sixty days."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; iloat statute; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; interpretation; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1462
79th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
Another official has applied to intervene in the complaints. "Since the complaints [...] are irreceivable so is her application to intervene in them."
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; intervention; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The intervener offers no factual evidence to show that her duties entitled her to the allowance. She merely says that she is in the same position as two of the complainants. "She neither shows nor even seeks to show that she is in the same position in fact and in law as others who are claiming the allowance in complaints to the Tribunal. So her application is [...] irreceivable."
Keywords:
condition; identical claims; identical facts; intervention; receivability of the complaint; same purpose;
Consideration 4
Extract:
Vide Judgment 398, considerations 1 and 2.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 92 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS GOVERNING OFFICIALS OF THE EUROCONTROL AGENCY
ILOAT Judgment(s): 398
Keywords:
case law; complaint; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; staff regulations and rules; time bar;
Judgment 1455
79th Session, 1995
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
Vide Judgment 532, consideration 3.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 532
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case law; complaint; exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; interpretation; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1452
79th Session, 1995
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant has come to the Tribunal without waiting for the completion of the internal appeal procedure and for the final decision by the Director-General that will result therefrom. He has therefore failed to exhaust the means of internal appeal and there is no final decision yet for him to impugn. Article VII(3) does not apply."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; cause of action; complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1451
79th Session, 1995
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"In Judgment 1932 - submits the [organisation] - the Tribunal held under 18 and 24 that [...] a suit, [filed in the general interests of the civil service,] of which the hallmark is action by staff associations or agents professing to represent them, does not form part of the system of individual appeal that the organisations which have recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction commonly provide for in their rules and that the Tribunal's own Statute contemplates. The Tribunal need not revert to that case law since this is not such a complaint. It has been filed by several officials with the commendable aim of making the proceedings simpler, and each of them is defending his own individual interests, even though they are the same as the others'. The objection [to receivability for being a 'collective' complaint] fails."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1392
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union;
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The [amendment in question] strikes out of the terms of employment ipso facto the safeguard of international judicial review and vests jurisdiction in municipal courts instead. The amendment brings about an immediate and almost irreversible change in the system of appeal. So [...] every staff member has an actual and present interest in having light shed on the matter. The Tribunal affords guarantees of a system of international law within the bounds of its competence: see Judgments 1265, under 24, and 1328, under 13. It would therefore be wrong to deny the staff the right of appeal on the grounds that the impugned decision is general in purport."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1265, 1328
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; competence of tribunal; complaint; general decision; internal appeal; municipal court; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; safeguard; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;
Consideration 21
Extract:
"The [organisation pleads] that to quash a general decision on an application from a few might damage the interests of others who wanted it to remain in force. The plea is certainly material since [...] the staff of the UPU seem to disagree about the amendment [in question]. But the Tribunal is satisfied that when a decision has been challenged, albeit by only a few, it has a duty to rule in full objectivity and as soon as possible. The Union itself has well defended the interests of those who want to keep the decision, and they themselves may do so by filing applications to intervene."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; application for quashing; complaint; general decision; intervention; receivability of the complaint; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 19
Extract:
The organisation objects to the receivability of the complaint because "the impugned decision makes amendments to the regulations and is therefore a general one about the tenor of rules. As was said in Judgment 1393, under 6 to 8, the Tribunal has often ruled on the issue, especially for the purpose of determining when the time limit starts for appeal. It has held that where a general decision gives rise to decisions affecting individuals the time limit is set off only on notification to the official of the individual decision that affects him. Moreover, as was held in Judgment 1000, under 12, the employee may, when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly, 'challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision [...] that affords the basis of the individual one'. In sum, the staff member need not ordinarily impugn at once a general decision he believes has caused him injury but may, without any risk of being time-barred, wait until the general decision affects him in the form of an individual one."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000, 1393
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; complaint; date of notification; general decision; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1450
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
Having been denied permanent appointments, the complainants are seeking compensation failing reinstatement. The EPO pleads that the claim is irreceivable for failure to exhaust the internal remedies open to them. "The EPO fails in its preliminary objection to the complainants' claim to damages. [...] It may not refuse the complainants access to the appeal procedure on the grounds that they are 'auxiliary' staff, yet say that they ought, in what amounted to preliminary appeal [...] to have demarcated the full ambit of any future litigation."
Keywords:
claim; good faith; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; material damages; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant;
Consideration 20
Extract:
Having been denied permanent appointments, the complainants are seeking compensation failing reinstatement. The EPO pleads that the claim is irreceivable for failure to exhaust the internal remedies open to them. "The EPO fails in its preliminary objection to the complainants' claim to damages. [...] The organisation must realise, it is precisely in cases like this, about termination of employment, that the Tribunal may [...] itself award damages if it deems reinstatement impossible."
Keywords:
application of law ex officio; claim; internal remedies exhausted; material damages; receivability of the complaint; reinstatement; subsidiary;
Judgment 1448
79th Session, 1995
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 17-18
Extract:
"The Tribunal holds that the decision [against which the complainant submitted an internal appeal] was not a final one, the object [...] being only to initiate discussion: see Judgment 336 [...]. Although he had been identified as a staff member 'likely to be terminated', there was [...] no actual decision that he would be terminated at such and such a date or on stated terms". "He failed to submit an appeal [against the final decision] and thereby failed to exhaust the internal means of redress available to him. Accordingly, his complaint is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 336
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case law; complaint; decision; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; statement of intent;
Judgment 1443
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The complainant may not put wider claims to the Tribunal than in the internal appeal".
Keywords:
claim; complaint; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Some of the complainant's [...] procedural and substantive objections [rely on] claims and pleas [presented by] other staff whose appeals also went to the Appeals Committee. As the EPO [correctly] observes, the material issues of this complaint are [limited to] the decision he was challenging in his internal appeal."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1442
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The EPO pleads that the complaint is irreceivable on the grounds that theinternal appeal came too long after the announcement of the disputed measure and the general decision to apply it to the staff. "The objection cannot be sustained. What the complainant is impugning is not those general decisions but theapplication of them to himself which would be the consequence of the EPO's holding to its - in his view mistaken - interpretation of them."
Keywords:
complaint; general decision; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 10
Extract:
A staff member's application to intervene succeeds "insofar as his claims concur with the complainant's and he is in like case. But insofar as he objects to certain statements in the surrejoinder and seeks compensation for injury the organisation's attitude caused him, he is raising issues of no relevance to this case and to that extent his application is irreceivable."
Keywords:
condition; intervention; receivability of the complaint;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 | next >
|
