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

Receivability of the complaint (76, 77, 78, 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: 687

< 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 | next >



  • Judgment 280


    37th Session, 1976
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "According to Article II, paragraph 1, of its Statute the Tribunal may hear complaints lodged by officials subject to its jurisdiction alleging non-observance of the terms of their appointment or the Staff Regulations. The present complaint fulfils those requirements and is therefore receivable. It is immaterial that the complainant left the service of the organisation [...] since he is contesting decisions taken earlier. [...] To be receivable a complaint need only [...] allege breach of provisions or principles applicable to the staff."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    cause of action; competence of tribunal; consequence; receivability of the complaint; separation from service;



  • Judgment 279


    37th Session, 1976
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    According to paragraph 3 of Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal, "where the complainant alleges failure to take a decision, or an implied decision to dismiss his appeal, the period of ninety days shall run from the expiration of the sixty days allowed for the taking of the decision by the administration."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; failure to answer claim; implied decision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal provides that a complaint shall not be receivable unless the internal means of redress have been exhausted. The right to submit a claim to an advisory body is regarded as an internal means of redress." In the present case, any decision taken by the administration and challenged by a staff member had to be referred within thirty days to the Advisory Board. "The complainant did not at any time appeal to that board and thereby failed to have recourse to internal means of redress at his disposal."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; advisory body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 278


    37th Session, 1976
    International Patent Institute
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "Although the applications to intervene [...] all of which have been submitted by [...] staff members who have an interest in the quashing of the impugned decision, are receivable, they are, like the complaints themselves, unfounded."

    Keywords:

    cause of action; intervention; receivability of the complaint;

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "The complaints are seeking to have quashed decisions whereby the Administrative Council [...] refused to revise the application to them of the staff pension scheme [...]. Thus what are being impugned are individual decisions, even though they are based entirely on a decision of a general character affecting all staff members."

    Keywords:

    adjustment; application for quashing; competence of tribunal; decision; executive body; general decision; individual decision; pension; pension adjustment system; receivability of the complaint; refusal;



  • Judgment 277


    37th Session, 1976
    International Patent Institute
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The organisation maintains that the internal appeal was time-barred and therefore irreceivable. "According to Article VII, paragraph 1, of its Statute [the Tribunal] is required to consider merely whether the internal means of redress have been exhausted - in this case whether the Director-General's" original decision led to a recommendation by the Appeals Committee. That condition is undoubtedly fulfilled, and the complaint is therefore receivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; time bar;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "It is immaterial that the Appeals Committee may have erred in hearing the appeal. The fact is that it gave its views and consequently the complainant had recourse to the internal means of redress available to him."

    Keywords:

    consequence; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; time bar; time limit;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "Although the Tribunal must determine whether its own time limit for filing a complaint has been respected, it will not review the observance of procedural rules in internal bodies. It merely notes that such bodies have heard the appeal. The most that can be said is that matters would have been different had the Director-General in his final decision expressed reservations on the propriety of the appeals procedure."

    Keywords:

    internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; time limit;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The organisation contends that the complainant first made the material claim in the complaint he filed with the Tribunal. The Tribunal holds that "the complainant merely repeats in different terms the claim made in his letter [to the Director-General]."

    Keywords:

    new claim; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 275


    36th Session, 1976
    International Patent Institute
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "It is not necessary to consider whether the internal time limit was respected since the Appeals Committee decided on the merits."

    Keywords:

    internal appeal; internal appeals body; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 272


    36th Session, 1976
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The request which the complainant addressed to the organization was never either accepted or rejected. She then filed a complaint with the Tribunal and "based it on the silence of the organization and on Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Tribunal's Statute. The organization does not dispute that the complaint falls within Article VII and accordingly, so far as that article is concerned, the complaint is receivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 270


    36th Session, 1976
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "According to Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal a complaint is receivable only if the complainant has exhausted all means of redress available to him under the staff regulations, i.e. the internal means of redress. Hence [...] staff members [of the defendant organisation] may lodge a complaint with the Tribunal only if within a period of three months they have submitted an appeal to the [competent] authority [...] as provided for [in the regulations]. Moreover, the complainant's claims for relief are receivable only if they fall within the scope of that appeal."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    claim; complaint; condition; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "In view of the explanations which it contains, and in particular the reference to a circular subsequent to the notification [contested by complainant], the reply [by the organisation] is not a mere confirmation of that notification. In fact it is a new decision which gave rise to a new time limit for appeal."

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 269


    36th Session, 1976
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "Being bound by the scope of the complainant's claims for relief the Tribunal is not required to consider the complainant's allegation of an attempt at bribery. If that allegation were proved the attempt at bribery would be subsequent to the abolition of post and merely a consequence thereof. Hence it cannot properly be relied upon to justify the quashing of the impugned decision and the complainant's reinstatement, the only claims for relief which she has made."

    Keywords:

    claim; competence of tribunal; complaint; limits; receivability of the complaint; subsequent fact;



  • Judgment 263


    35th Session, 1975
    International Patent Institute
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal prescribes the possibility of appealing to the Tribunal where the administration fails to take a decision upon a claim within sixty days from the notification of that claim. [A provision] of the Staff Regulations [...] lays down the same rule in a different form. It provides that if a claim addressed to the Director-General or the Administrative Council has not been decided upon within sixty days of the date of its notification or submission it is deemed to be dismissed."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 261


    35th Session, 1975
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "The complaint does not relate to any non-observance by the organization of the complainant's terms of appointment and consequently this claim falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. It is therefore unnecessary to consider whether or not it is time-barred."

    Keywords:

    breach; cause of action; claim; competence of tribunal; complaint; consequence; no cause of action; organisation; receivability of the complaint; terms of appointment; time bar;



  • Judgment 259


    35th Session, 1975
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The decision in question, which merely upheld an earlier decision, could "not give rise to new time limits for the lodging of an appeal by the complainant."

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; decision; internal appeal; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;

    Considerations

    Extract:

    Under the applicable provision, the complainant had a period of six weeks in which to appeal against the decision which he regarded as detrimental. "No appeal having been lodged within that period, the decision had [...] become final [...] when the complainant asked for review of his case. The Secretary-General and subsequently the Appeal Board therefore acted lawfully in dismissing the request on that ground." No exceptional circumstances warranted a derogation from the prescribed time limits.

    Keywords:

    decision; internal appeal; mandatory time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 258


    35th Session, 1975
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The complaint was filed "clearly after the expiry of the time limit set by Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal. It is declared irreceivable in accordance with Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Rules of court, notwithstanding the absence of any reply by the organization on the merits."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE;
    ARTICLE 8, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE RULES


    Keywords:

    complaint; receivability of the complaint; summary procedure; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 256


    34th Session, 1975
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The contested act [the issue of an attestation to a third party] is a decision in the true sense of the term. "[T]here is no need for the impugned decision itself to pronounce on the validity of an earlier decision. Otherwise an appeals body could never be called upon to determine the lawfulness of any act other than a decision, and that would run counter to commonly held opinion. It is therefore immaterial in the present case whether or not the issue of an attestation may be regarded as a decision."

    Keywords:

    communication to third party; criteria; decision; definition; receivability of the complaint;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The complainant attacks the issue of an attestation containing details of his recruitment and his private life to the lawyer of his former wife. The Tribunal rules that this is indeed a decision but in order for the claim to be receivable, the complainant "must [...] have an interest which is worth safeguarding. On that score there is no doubt."

    Keywords:

    cause of action; communication to third party; personal file; receivability of the complaint;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant invites the Tribunal to declare that a confidential file has been compiled relating to him; he seeks to be allowed to consult the file and have it destroyed. "These claims are receivable since the complainant has an interest in ensuring that all the documents concerning him should be put in his personal file, to which he has free access under [the applicable provision]. Also receivable are the claims [asking for] a list of the documents to which he is denied access, those claims being implicitly included in his original claims for relief."

    Keywords:

    application for quashing; cause of action; claim; complainant; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; personal file; receivability of the complaint; request by a party;



  • Judgment 255


    34th Session, 1975
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The letter from the chief of personnel "is not expressed as a decision but as a letter enclosing an appraisal report [...] The complainant however did not wish to disagree with the report; he wished to contend that it was not an appraisal report at all and to claim what he called a proper report. He was within his rights in taking this course by his letter [...] and since the Director-General has failed to act upon it paragraph 3 of Article VII applies."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; omission; performance report; receivability of the complaint;

    Considerations

    Extract:

    On 23 January the complainant received an appraisal report. On 20 March he requested that a proper appraisal be made. The letter of 23 January "is not expressed as a decision but as a letter enclosing an appraisal report [...] The complainant [...] did not wish to disagree with the report; he wished to contend that it was not an appraisal report at all and to obtain what he called a proper report. He was within his rights in taking this course by his letter of 20 March; and since the Director-General has failed to act upon it paragraph 3 of Article VII applies."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    exception; failure to answer claim; omission; performance report; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 249


    34th Session, 1975
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The complainant "did not appeal to the Tribunal against either decision within the statutory time limits. The decisions have therefore become final and are no longer open to appeal unless the Secretary-General exercises his power to reopen the case."

    Keywords:

    case reopened; decision; exception; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 246


    33rd Session, 1974
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "[T]he complainant impugns an alleged decision by the Director-General, that is to say an administrative decision which may be referred to the Appeals Board. Since the complainant did not submit his claim to the Appeals Board it is irreceivable by virtue of Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal, which stipulates that the internal means of redress shall first have been exhausted."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; internal remedies exhausted; new claim; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 244


    33rd Session, 1974
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "[T]he complainant did not object to the terms of [his appointments, which gave him local status,] at any time before or during their period of validity. It was only after the appointments had expired that he maintained that Geneva could not lawfully be stated to be his home. It was therefore no longer open to him to contest the terms of appointment, which had become final."

    Keywords:

    contract; decision; local status; non-local status; receivability of the complaint; residence; terms of appointment; time bar;



  • Judgment 240


    33rd Session, 1974
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "A request for interpretation of a judgment by the Administrative Tribunal is receivable only if the operative part of the judgment gives rise to uncertainty or ambiguity about its meaning or purport."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 211

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; condition; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 238


    33rd Session, 1974
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The impugned decisions relate to two different competitions and are contested on different grounds, although "each of them affects the complainant's career in a very similar way. The complainant may therefore refer them to the Tribunal in one and the same complaint."

    Keywords:

    appointment; career; competition; consequence; decision; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 236


    32nd Session, 1974
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The publication of a list of officials does not confirm the decision to transfer the complainant [against which appeal is time-barred] and does not constitute a new decision. The complaint is irreceivable.

    Keywords:

    complaint; confirmatory decision; receivability of the complaint; time bar; transfer;

    Considerations 3-4

    Extract:

    The complaint was filed on 30 March. To be receivable it must impugn a decision notified to complainant on a date not before 30 December 1972. The decision of 17 November 1972 was the decision to transfer the complainant. "The complaint against it is clearly out of time."

    Keywords:

    complaint; date of notification; decision; receivability of the complaint; time bar;

< 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 | next >


 
Last updated: 28.10.2020 ^ top