Judgment No. 108
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 3
Extract:
The decision to terminate the complainant was notified to him by cable on 1 April and confirmed by letter of 10 April. On 6 April he "addressed a letter to the competent authority announcing his intention of appealing against his termination and asking for various particulars. This letter must be regarded as a protest against the administrative decision of the Director-General".
Keywords
formal requirements; internal appeal
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The fact that the Director-General had not given a ruling in accordance with [the material provision] could be regarded as failure to take a decision on a claim, thus entitling complainant to have recourse to the Tribunal under Article VII, paragraph 3, of its Statute. [However] the complainant would have had to file his complaint with the Administrative Tribunal within the 90 days following the 60 days during which the Director-General failed to give a ruling on his claim [...]. [He] is obviously time-barred."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords
complaint; failure to answer claim; receivability of the complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; time limit; time bar
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Once the complainant did not ask for a hearing within the [...] time limit provided for [under the material provision], the appeal which he later instituted [...] was not receivable [...]. Consequently [...] insofar as it sought to resist the Director-General's decision to accept the opinion of the Appeals Board recognising that it was irreceivable the complaint is unfounded and must be dismissed."
Keywords
receivability of the complaint; internal appeal; time bar
| 
