Judgment No. 1892
1. THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED.
2. EUROCONTROL'S COUNTERCLAIMS ARE DISMISSED.
"The claims relating to the failure to execute the judgment sending the case back to the organisation for a new ruling on his appeal [...] must be disallowed because the [...] procedure necessitated by the judgment quashing the original decision was [...] implemented swiftly." [After a new recommendation by the Joint Committee for Disputes, the Director General rejected the complainant's new internal appeal three and a half months after the Tribunal's judgment that was then made the subject of an application for execution.]
application for execution; decision; internal appeal; time limit; delay; judgment of the tribunal; decision quashed; remand; case sent back to organisation; execution of judgment
By its Judgment 1814 the Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the complainant's appeal and sent the case back to the organisation. The Tribunal considers that "it was appropriate to resume the procedure by referring the matter back to the Joint Committee for Disputes because it was the unlawful nature of the latter's opinion that led to the quashing of the decision. However, proper execution of the judgment did not necessarily imply recognition that the complainant's appeal was sound: all that was required was a new decision taken after due process."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1814
application for execution; decision; internal appeals body; internal appeal; report; judgment of the tribunal; decision quashed; remand; case sent back to organisation; execution of judgment; due process; organisation's duties; flaw; purport