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

Time limit (108, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 433, 771, 772, 773, 774, 775, 776, 777, 778, 781,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Time limit
Total judgments found: 307

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 | next >



  • Judgment 1095


    70th Session, 1991
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    "A complaint is receivable under Article VII(3) where the administration fails to take any decision upon the claim within sixty days of the date of notification of it. Once an organisation has accepted the Tribunal's Statute it may not derogate from Article VII(3) by dint of internal rules of its own. The only difference Eurocontrol's own Staff Regulations may make is that it is estopped from objecting to receivability when, in reliance on its own time limit, a staff member has filed a complaint that would be receivable under its Staff Regulations but out of time under Article VII."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; consequence; difference; failure to answer claim; good faith; iloat statute; precedence of rules; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 1091


    70th Session, 1991
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    The complainant's appeal against delays in the procedure to regrade his post was rejected by a decision of 10 October 1989. The decision was confirmed in a memorandum of 4 December 1989. The time limit for appeal to the Tribunal ran from 10 October. The complaint having been filed on 2 March 1990 it is time-barred.

    Keywords:

    complaint; confirmatory decision; decision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 1082


    70th Session, 1991
    Intergovernmental Council of Copper Exporting Countries
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    As stated in Judgment 873 (in re Da) the CIPEC Staff Regulations do not provide for internal appeal. But that does not preclude the organisation's entertaining such an appeal ex gratia."The complainant addressed an appeal to the decision- making authority" before the expiry of ninety days from the date of the original decision and the Secretary-General's answer was to uphold that decision. So it is fair to take the ninety days as running from the date of confirmation and treat the complaint as filed in time."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 873

    Keywords:

    complaint; internal appeal; no provision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;



  • Judgment 1081


    70th Session, 1991
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The fact "that the measure under challenge affects several groups of staff and is therefore general in purport [...] does not in itself make the complaints irreceivable: decisions do not need to be individual to be challengeable before the Tribunal. As Article VII(2) of the Tribunal's Statute makes plain, a general decision too is challengeable. That article sets the time limit for filing a complaint against 'a decision affecting a class of officials', in other words a general decision. Yet that does not mean that a complaint challenging any sort of general decision will necessarily be receivable: there is also the rule in VII(1) that the internal means of redress must have been exhausted."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) AND (2) OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; condition; date; general decision; iloat statute; individual decision; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 1075


    70th Session, 1991
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    The complainant's appointment was terminated by an agreement both parties reached under Article 11.16 of the Staff Regulations. He submits that the agreement is null and void because he signed it under duress. The Tribunal holds that the only pressure the ILO applied on him was the setting of a time limit (one day according to the complainant, two days according to the administration), but there was nothing improper in that.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 11.16 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS

    Keywords:

    lack of consent; time limit;



  • Judgment 1064


    70th Session, 1991
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2, Summary

    Extract:

    On 3 April 1990 the complainant filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 972, which was delivered on 27 June 1989. Neither the Statute nor the Rules of Court set any time limit for the filing of such applications (see Judgment 538). The Tribunal will look at the circumstances in which a claim is made before deciding what constitutes a reasonable time. In the instant case the complainant is not guilty of such delay as to make his application irreceivable.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 538

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; no provision; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 1052


    69th Session, 1990
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The complainant got word of the decision not to renew his contract before receiving formal notification. "The only date that matters for the purpose of reckoning the time limit in [Article] VII(2) [of the Tribunal's Statute] is the date of formal notification of the final decision in writing."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; date of notification; decision; formal requirements; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;



  • Judgment 1046


    69th Session, 1990
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    The complainant was transferred on 1 February 1988. On 5 February he got notice that his contract would not be renewed because of an unsatisfactory report concerning his new assignment. The Tribunal holds that "it was incumbent on the [organization] to give him a fair trial in the job, and [...] to ask after the lapse of only four days for an immediate replacement was to act with undue haste."

    Keywords:

    contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reasonable time; time limit; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 1039


    69th Session, 1990
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    The complainant lodged two internal appeals against the decision not to renew her appointment. Her first appeal, which she submitted directly to the Board, was irreceivable because under paragraph 7(a) she ought first to have addressed her claim to the Director-General. The second appeal, which she did address to the Director-General, was out of time by one day. There having been no waiver of the time limit under paragraph 8 of the Statutes, her complaint is irreceivable.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: PARAGRAPHS 7(A) AND 8 OF THE STATUTES OF THE UNESCO APPEALS BOARD

    Keywords:

    formal requirements; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 1022


    69th Session, 1990
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant relies on an acquired right to three months' notice as stipulated in her contract. The organization gave her six months' notice. "There is an acquired right only where an amendment to the material rules that is to the official's detriment disrupts the structure of the contract or impairs the fundamental terms of employment that induced him to take up duty with the organization." That condition is plainly not met in the instant case.

    Keywords:

    acquired right; contract; notice; termination of employment; terms of appointment; time limit;

    Considerations 9-10, Summary

    Extract:

    The Staff Rules provide for a two-month period of consideration to allow the official to decide whether or not to accept the transfer offer. But the decision notified to the complainant failed to allow the two-month limit and was therefore tainted by a formal flaw. As the flaw does not go to the essence of the decision, the Tribunal held that the organization was liable on technical grounds.

    Keywords:

    flaw; formal flaw; time limit; transfer;



  • Judgment 1021


    69th Session, 1990
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    Vide Judgment 1022, consideration 5.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1022

    Keywords:

    acquired right; contract; notice; termination of employment; terms of appointment; time limit;



  • Judgment 1020


    69th Session, 1990
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    After initially accepting the organization's offer of transfer made in connection with its headquarters move, the complainants changed their minds. Their appointments were then terminated. The organization calculated the period of notice as if they had turned the transfer offers down from the start. The complainants argue that the period of notice must run from the day they made their position known and that they are therefore entitled to compensation. The Tribunal holds that such an interpretation runs counter to the applicable provisions since the organization's intention was to treat all staff members who refused the offer of transfer in the same way, whatever the date of their refusal.

    Keywords:

    compensatory allowance; compensatory measure; notice; refusal; start of time limit; termination of employment; time limit; transfer; transfer of headquarters;



  • Judgment 1019


    69th Session, 1990
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    Vide Judgment 1020.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1020

    Keywords:

    compensatory allowance; compensatory measure; notice; refusal; start of time limit; termination of employment; time limit; transfer; transfer of headquarters;



  • Judgment 1011


    68th Session, 1990
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "Article VII of the Tribunal's Statute says that a complaint shall not be receivable unless the decision impugned is a final one and such remedies as are available under the applicable Staff Regulations have been exhausted. To satisfy that requirement, which is mandatory, the staff member must duly lodge an internal appeal with the competent body within the time limit in the Staff Regulations."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    formal requirements; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; time limit;



  • Judgment 1010


    68th Session, 1990
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant appealed against the decision to dismiss him after the expiry of the time-limit. He maintains that "he was never told of the time limits in the rules. Though that plea might succeed in exceptional cases, it cannot in this one, since the complainant was given a copy of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules on conclusion of the contract of appointment."

    Keywords:

    duty to inform; internal appeal; staff regulations and rules; time limit;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant's internal appeal against termination after the extension of his probation is time-barred. He argues "that an unregistered letter from someone other than the Director-General cannot constitute proper notice of dismissal or of extension of probation. [The] plea fails [...]. Provided that the staff member is given official notice of a decision the time limit starts to run and there is no need for special procedural formalities. And the absence of the Director-General's signature can have no effect on the time limit for appeal even though it may in some circumstances warrant setting the decision aside."

    Keywords:

    consequence; decision; flaw; formal flaw; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 1006


    68th Session, 1990
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    In 1988 the Secretary-General decided to reverse a decision which the then Secretary-General took in 1979 to grant the complainant non-local status. The reason for the reversal was that the original decision had not been warranted. The Tribunal holds that "even if that decision was based on facts that were wrong and even if there was misinterpretation of Regulation 16 [now Staff Rule 14.6 on how to determine an official's home], it was in any event too late by 1988 to reverse a decision that the organization had already abided by for almost nine years." The impugned decision is quashed.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: RULE 14.6 OF THE WTO STAFF REGULATIONS

    Keywords:

    flaw; local status; non-local status; time limit; withdrawal of decision;



  • Judgment 1005


    68th Session, 1990
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    The complainant claimed the benefit of a decision delivered on 12 December 1986 (Judgment 792). She got notice of the organisation's final decision to refuse her claim in a letter dated 26 February 1988. But she failed to challenge that decision within the ninety-day limit laid down in Article VII(2) of the Statute. So her complaint is time-barred.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(2) OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    complaint; enforcement; judgment of the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 997


    68th Session, 1990
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "As the Tribunal held in Judgment 647, provided a communication takes the form of a decision, its lawfulness is immaterial for the purpose of lodging an appeal." In the circumstances of the case the complainant's internal appeal against a decision requiring him to take home leave before a specified date was time-barred. The complaint is irreceivable.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 647

    Keywords:

    consequence; decision; flaw; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 995


    68th Session, 1990
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "According to Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute a complaint shall not be receivable unless the impugned decision is final, the complainant having exhausted the means of redress available to him under the staff regulations. That constitutes a requirement to follow any internal procedure laid down in the Staff Regulations: the staff member must not only respect the time limits for appeal but also comply with any stipulations as to procedure in the Regulations or Implementing Rules."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    enforcement; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time limit;



  • Judgment 994


    68th Session, 1990
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    Three successive decisions to promote the complainant were taken: a promotion by direct selection from grade G.6 to P.3 as from 1 July 1986; a personal promotion from G.6 to G.7 as from 1 January 1985 and the outcome of a procedure which led to his post being regraded from G.6 to P.3 effective on 1 February 1984. The complainant challenges the Administration's decision to treat the regrading decision as void. The regrading decision was accepted by the complainant and showed no flaw. As it became final on the expiry of the time limit for challenge, the Administration may not go back on it.

    Keywords:

    condition; cumulative decisions; flaw; personal promotion; post classification; professional category; promotion; time limit; withdrawal of decision;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 | next >


 
Last updated: 23.11.2020 ^ top