Judgment No. 2178

• Organization: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)
• Date: 03.02.2003
• Original: French
• Judges: Ba, Gentot, Hugessen
• Full judgment text - Full judgment text (french)

Decision

1. THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED.
2. THE FEDERATION'S COUNTERCLAIM IS ALSO DISMISSED.

Considerations 3-4

Extract:

The complainant filed an application for execution less than two months after the judgment on his first complaint was delivered. "The haste with which he came to the Tribunal is all the more regrettable for the fact that the discussions taking place between the parties could have enabled them, if not to reach an agreement, then at least to clarify certain aspects of the case which remain uncertain [...]. The Federation raises the question of whether under these circumstances the application for execution is receivable. However, the Tribunal's case law shows a constant line of precedent on this issue: any serious difficulty concerning the execution of a judgment can validly be brought before the Tribunal by means of an application for execution. In the present case, it is to be regretted that the difficulties could not be overcome by the parties through discussion in good faith, but the Federation may not object to the receivability of the complainant's application."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 2090

Keywords

application for execution; receivability of the complaint; time limit; judgment of the tribunal; iloat; execution of judgment; case law; condition

Consideration 8

Extract:

In its judgment on the complainant's first complaint the Tribunal ordered that he be compensated because he had been wrongfully terminated. In his application for review of that judgment "the complainant seeks compensation in respect of the loss of the tax immunities he enjoyed by virtue of the agreement between the [...] authorities [of the host country] and the [organisation]. Since the complainant has not been reinstated in his post, he is no longer entitled to those immunities. Nor is he entitled to compensation for the loss thereof: the tax regime governing the exemptions he may claim is solely a matter for the competent authorities of the host state, and the [organisation] cannot be held liable for direct or indirect taxes owed by the complainant."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 2090

Keywords

application for execution; judgment of the tribunal; reconstruction of career; domestic law; headquarters agreement; reinstatement; allowance; privileges and immunities; tax; request by a party