Judgment No. 3394
1. The case is referred back to the Organization in order that it execute in full Judgment 3119 by paying the full amount of salary and allowances without any deductions whatsoever.
2. WIPO shall pay the complainant compensation in the amount of 5,000 Swiss francs for moral injury.
3. It shall pay him 5,000 francs as a penalty for each month of delay, as indicated under 15.
4. It shall also pay him an additional 4,000 francs for costs related to this application.
5. All other claims are dismissed.
The Tribunal considered that, by taking it upon itself to interpret Judgment 3119, WIPO breached its duty to execute that judgment fully and correctly.
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3119
application for execution; complaint allowed; res judicata; case sent back to organisation; execution of judgment; organisation's duties
The Tribunalís judgments carry the authority of res judicata and must be executed by the parties as ruled. They may not be called into question except when an application for review is allowed. They may form the subject of an application for interpretation by the Tribunal only if one party considers that the ruling is deficient or insufficiently clear (see Judgment 1887, under 8).
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1887
application for interpretation; res judicata
The Tribunal considers that WIPO, by taking it upon itself to interpret Judgment 3119 and by deciding of its own initiative to pay the complainant only two thirds of the sums due under point 2 of the decision, breached its duty to execute that judgment fully and correctly.
Since, in the instant case, the Tribunal did not order the deduction from the sums due of any income received by the complainant during the period of his expulsion from WIPO, the latter was in no way entitled to make the full payment of these sums subject to the complainantís declaration of such income or, of its own initiative, to make any deduction in that respect from the aforementioned sums.
If the Organization deemed interpretation of the judgment in question necessary, it should have filed an application to that end. It did not do so. Moreover the Tribunal emphasises that, in Judgment 3119, it purposely decided that, unlike in certain other cases, in view of the circumstances, there were no grounds for deducting any income received by the staff member in question during his period of expulsion from the Organization.
The application for execution must therefore be allowed.
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3119
application for execution
In accordance with the principle of good faith and good administrative practice, the Organization will supply the complainant with the details of the sums due to him, as he requested.
good faith; duty to inform