Judgment No. 4199
The application for review is dismissed.
The complainant filed an application for review of Judgment 4022.
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4022
application for review; summary procedure; complaint dismissed
Consistent precedent has it that a judgment of the Tribunal may be reviewed only in exceptional circumstances and on strictly limited grounds. The rationale for this was stated, for example, in Judgments 3815, consideration 4, and 3899, consideration 3, as follows:
“[P]ursuant to Article VI of its Statute, the Tribunal’s judgments are ‘final and without appeal’ and have res judicata authority. They may therefore be reviewed only in exceptional circumstances and on strictly limited grounds. As stated, for example, in Judgments 1178, 1507, 2059, 2158 and 2736, the only admissible grounds for review are failure to take account of material facts, a material error involving no exercise of judgement, an omission to rule on a claim, or the discovery of new facts which the complainant was unable to rely on in the original proceedings. Moreover, these pleas must be likely to have a bearing on the outcome of the case. Pleas of a mistake of law, failure to admit evidence, misinterpretation of the facts or omission to rule on a plea, on the other hand, afford no grounds for review (see, for example, Judgments 3001, under 2, 3452, under 2, and 3473, under 3).”
ILOAT reference: Article VI of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1178, 1507, 2059, 2158, 2736, 3001, 3452, 3473, 3815, 3899
admissible grounds for review
The complainant contends, as a second ground for review, that the Tribunal committed a material error. He submits that it made a mistaken finding of fact involving an error of judgement [...]. [T]his is [...] an inadmissible ground for review, as it essentially seeks to call into question the Tribunal’s exercise of judgement in assessing the evidence. [S]uch a plea affords no grounds for review.
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review