Judgment No. 1500
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
"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."
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE;
ARTICLE 6(1) AND 6(2) OF THE RULES
complaint; decision; receivability of the complaint; formal requirements; time limit; correction of complaint; date of notification; iloat statute; date
"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."
complaint; claim; decision; receivability of the complaint; formal requirements; time limit; correction of complaint; iloat statute
Advancement under Staff Regulation 3.4 "consists in rising by steps: any staff member qualifies for it who meets the conditions of seniority and 'satisfactory service'. Personal promotion means rising in grade without any change in duties and is a benefit that the Director General may bestow at discretion. He does so only in 'exceptional circumstances' to reward someone for services of a quality higher than that ordinarily expected of the holder of the post."
Organization rules reference: WIPO STAFF REGULATION 3.4
staff regulations and rules; increment; personal promotion; discretion; executive head; condition; right
In an earlier judgment the Tribunal held a disputed report to be lawful "so the issue is res judicata and not now open to appeal. [The complainant] cannot properly impute 'malice aforethought' to the reporting officer because he cites no fact he could not have relied on in his earlier complaint and which might afford valid grounds for review of [the judgment in question]."
application for review; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; res judicata
The complainant "argues that [the Internal Memorandum] is unlawful because it was not given the sort of publication that he says the case law and several international instruments required. But he did have access to the Memorandum since he asked the Director General [...] to apply it in his favour. So lack of wider publication caused him no injury [...]".
lack of injury; administrative instruction; publication