ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword > application for execution

Judgment No. 4093

Decision

WHO shall pay the complainant, in accordance with point 2 of the decision in Judgment 3689, interest at a rate of 5 per cent per annum on the sums due by virtue of his entitlements as indicated in consideration 4 of that judgment that were not paid to him within 90 days of the public delivery of Judgment 3689. Such interest shall accrue, for each of these sums, from the date of the public delivery of the said judgment until the date of their payment.

Summary

The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgment 3689.

Judgment keywords

Keywords

application for execution; complaint allowed; illness

Consideration 3

Extract:

It should be recalled that the Tribunal’s judgments, which, under Article VI of its Statute, are “final and without appeal” and which, furthermore, have res judicata authority, are immediately operative (see, for example, Judgments 3003, consideration 12, and 3152, consideration 11). As they may not later be called into question except when an application for review is allowed, they must be executed by the parties as ruled (see, for example, Judgments 3566, consideration 6, and 3635, consideration 4). The parties must work together in good faith to execute judgments (see, for example, Judgments 2684, consideration 6, and 3823, consideration 4).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 2684, 3003, 3152, 3566, 3635, 3823

Keywords

application for execution; res judicata; good faith

Consideration 5

Extract:

[T]he Tribunal’s case law recognizes, as an exception to the principle recalled in consideration 3 [...], that in some cases an international organization may refrain from executing a judgment as ruled if execution proves impossible owing to subsequent facts or to pre-existing facts of which the Tribunal was unaware when it ruled on the case (see, inter alia, Judgments 3261, consideration 16, and 3824, consideration 4)[.]

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3261, 3824

Keywords

execution of judgment

Consideration 7

Extract:

[I]f the Organization considered that it was impossible to execute Judgment 3689 in accordance with its terms, it should have filed an application for review with the Tribunal (see Judgments 3635, consideration 8, or 3825, consideration 8). However, it did not lodge such an application in this case.

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3635, 3689, 3825

Keywords

execution of judgment

Consideration 8

Extract:

WHO is required to pay the complainant interest on arrears as ordered by the Tribunal in Judgment 3689. It should be recalled in this regard that such interest simply represents an objective form of compensation for the time that has elapsed since the date on which the principal amount was due, and that the mere fact that there was a delay in the payment of that amount is sufficient to justify payment of interest, whether or not the debtor was at fault (see, for example, Judgment 1403, consideration 8).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1403, 3689

Keywords

interest on damages; execution of judgment; delay in payment; interest on arrears

Consideration 9

Extract:

[I]t is not open to the Tribunal, when examining an application for execution, to modify the content of the provisions of the judgment in respect of which the application is made and it cannot therefore, in any event, determine the amount of compensation for late payment of the sums due to the complainant in a manner different to that provided for in Judgment 3689.

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3689

Keywords

execution of judgment



 
Last updated: 21.05.2020 ^ top