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 603


    52nd Session, 1984
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The complainant's "later discovery that the administration's decision might have been unlawful does not affect the time limit, which is an objective matter of fact and starts on the date on which the impugned decision was notified. Any other conclusion, even if founded on considerations of equity, would impair the stability of the parties' position in law, which is the purpose and indeed the whole point of setting a time limit. The only exception is where the organisation has misled the complainant and is therefore in breach of good faith."

    Keywords:

    consequence; date of notification; decision; exception; flaw; good faith; internal appeal; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 602


    52nd Session, 1984
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    Vide Judgment 603, consideration 3.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 603

    Keywords:

    internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    Vide Judgment 603, consideration 3.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 603

    Keywords:

    consequence; date of notification; decision; exception; flaw; good faith; internal appeal; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 575


    51st Session, 1983
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "According to Article VII[1] of the Statute of the Tribunal a complaint will not be receivable unless the means of redress provided by the Staff Regulations have been exhausted. To fulfil this condition it is not sufficient to address an appeal to the internal appeal bodies; the internal appeal must be submitted in time." In this case, the prescribed time limit was not respected. "Accordingly, the internal appeals procedure was not correctly followed, and the [...] complaint is irreceivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 553


    50th Session, 1983
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal's judgments have the authority of res judicata. An [...] organisation [...] is therefore bound [...] first and foremost to take whatever action the judgment may require. That the judgment must be both respected and executed are thus principles which are beyond dispute, and they apply, in particular, where the organisation is ordered to pay a sum of money. The debtor's obligation to pay must as a rule be discharged immediately unless the judgment states that the sum shall be payable only at some later date."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 463

    Keywords:

    execution of judgment; formal demand for payment; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; res judicata; time limit;



  • Judgment 548


    50th Session, 1983
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The time limit for submitting an internal appeal had long since expired when the complainant appealed to the Appeals Board. "The acceptance of his resignation had by then become final and was no longer open to challenge. His involvement in a serious accident [...] did not have the effect of suspending the time limit. The Director therefore correctly applied the rules in dismissing the appeal which the complainant addressed to him against the decision [to reject the internal appeal as being time-barred and therefore irreceivable]."

    Keywords:

    exception; internal appeal; new time limit; professional accident; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 533


    49th Session, 1982
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    To infer a decision to dismiss where no final decision has been taken within the sixty days would greatly broaden the scope of Article VII, paragraph 3, particularly when the internal appeals body has no set time limits. "In such case Article VII[3], which is presumably to be treated as covering the exception, would in fact become the rule. Moreover, to broaden the scope of paragraph 3 would unduly restrict that of paragraph 1, which requires the complainant to exhaust the internal means of redress."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; provision; time limit;



  • Judgment 532


    49th Session, 1982
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    Insofar as a provision of the Service Regulations purports to provide that failing a decision by the President on an internal appeal within two months, a complaint may be duly filed with the Tribunal, "the provision must be treated as invalid because this is a matter of procedure which only the Tribunal's own Statute and Rules of court can settle."

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; difference; iloat statute; precedence of rules; procedure before the tribunal; provision; staff regulations and rules; time limit;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The declaration of recognition mentioned in Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute of the Tribunal "recognises not only the Tribunal's competence but also the applicability of its Rules of court. An organisation which makes such a declaration accepts the provisions of the Statute and the Rules of court, and any provisions in its own rule book on the receivability of complaints filed with the Tribunal are of no effect, whether they comply with the Tribunal's rules or not."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 5, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    consequence; declaration of recognition; difference; enforcement; iloat statute; precedence of rules; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time limit;

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    Vide Judgment 533, consideration 3.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 533

    Keywords:

    exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; provision; time limit;



  • Judgment 528


    49th Session, 1982
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "Although the complainant took over eleven years to file a claim, it will not be declared time-barred in the absence of an express time limit. The time bar extinguishes obligations, and its existence will not be presumed: it must be expressly prescribed. [...] The sole consequence of the delay in lodging the claim is that proof is more difficult; but the matter is one of fact, not of law."

    Keywords:

    complaint; illness; invalidity; no provision; receivability of the complaint; service-incurred; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 522


    49th Session, 1982
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    "Time bars are essential to efficient administration, but they are not devised as a trap for what the organization in its argument describes as the 'legally non-vigilant person'."

    Keywords:

    good faith; purpose; time limit;



  • Judgment 517


    49th Session, 1982
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    The decision impugned was notified to the complainant on 25 May, and the ninety days accordingly expired on 23 August. Since 23 August was a sunday, the complaint, which was not filed until 24 August, is receivable.

    Keywords:

    complaint; consequence; date of notification; decision; public holiday; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 499


    48th Session, 1982
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "Article VII[1] does not lay down an absolute rule. A complainant may abandon the internal proceedings even before a decision is taken and may appeal directly to the Tribunal when the appeals body fails to report and there is no reason to suppose from the evidence that it is likely to do so within a reasonable period. But it must be quite clear from the evidence that there is no decision, and only in quite exceptional cases will the Tribunal find that the condition is met."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "The time limit for filing a complaint is ninety days, either after the notification of the express decision or from the expiry of the sixty-day time limit allowed for the taking of a decision by the organisation."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; failure to answer claim; further submissions on the merits; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 478


    47th Session, 1982
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    The complainant's first claim was rejected. In his reply to the second, which was based on the same cause of action as the first, "the Director, who had carried out no further inquiry, merely confirmed his earlier position. The [second] decision [...] was therefore purely confirmatory in character and did not give rise to any new time limit." As the time limit was not extended, the appeal is time-barred.

    Keywords:

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



  • Judgment 473


    47th Session, 1982
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations

    Extract:

    "The complainant filed his complaint within the time limit set in Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal. The fact that the Registrar invited him to supplement his complaint in accordance with Article 7 of the Rules of Court has no bearing on the question of receivability. In any event the complaint was brought into conformity with the Rules within the one-month time limit set in Article 7."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE;
    ARTICLE 7 OF THE RULES


    Keywords:

    complaint; correction of complaint; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 458


    46th Session, 1981
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 3-4

    Extract:

    The complainant sought the Director-General's approval, required under the material provisions, for him to to appeal directly to the Tribunal. Having received no reply within the time limit he had given, the complainant considered that the organization's silence was to be taken as consent. But the Director-General was not bound to answer the complainant by the deadline he had arbitrarily set. Furthermore, he did not ask for the Director-General's agreement until after the expiry of the time limit for addressing an appeal: he should therefore have expected a refusal. The complaint is clearly irreceivable.

    Keywords:

    acceptance; direct appeal to tribunal; executive head; failure to answer claim; provision; request by a party; staff regulations and rules; time limit;



  • Judgment 456


    46th Session, 1981
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 1-2

    Extract:

    The ninety-day time limit set in Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal will run from the date of expiry of the sixty-day time limit set in paragraph 3. The text of Article VII, paragraph 3, expressly provides for the addition of the two time limits and thus renders irreceivable any complaint filed after the expiry of the 150 days.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 2 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; start of time limit; time limit;



  • Judgment 451


    46th Session, 1981
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The rule that a complaint shall be receivable only if the internal means of redress have been exhausted is not a hard and fast one even though the Statute does not allow any derogation from it. If a complainant does all in her power to procure a decision and if nevertheless the internal appeals body either by its statements or by its conduct evinces an intention not to give a decision within a reasonable period, justice requires that an exception should be made. [...] When the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, such an intention can be inferred."

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 432


    45th Session, 1980
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    The Tribunal holds the medical report to be the final decision. In it the reasons for the decision are stated in clear and unambiguous terms. The word "decision" occurs in the text. The complaint is time-barred and irreceivable.

    Keywords:

    complaint; date of notification; decision; medical opinion; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 430


    45th Session, 1980
    European Molecular Biology Laboratory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 4-5

    Extract:

    The complaint was time-barred and thus irreceivable. The complainant's letter requesting an explanation for the non-confirmation of his appointment cannot be regarded as an application for further consideration on which the organisation should have acted. Consequently, the letter did not have the effect of setting a new time limit for filing a complaint with the Tribunal.

    Keywords:

    complaint; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 421


    45th Session, 1980
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Facts (D)

    Extract:

    "the [organisation] observes that the complainant filed his complaint before the 60 days specified in article vii, paragraph 3, of the statute of the tribunal had expired. since, however, the 60 days have now elapsed and he has not yet had a decision taken on his claim, the [organisation] will not contest the receivability of his complaint."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE ILOAT STATUTE

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 413


    44th Session, 1980
    European Molecular Biology Laboratory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    On 29 November 1978 the Director-General informed the complainant of his intention to renew his contract for one year, but that it could not be renewed for any longer. On 28 February 1979 the complainant asked on what grounds he had been dismissed. On 15 March the Director-General, in drawing a distinction between the expiry of a fixed-term contract and dismissal, declined to give the explanation asked for. "Thus [he] merely upheld the decision taken on 29 November [...] and so set no new time limit for filing a complaint." The complaint, dated 20 May 1979, is time-barred.

    Keywords:

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

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


 
Last updated: 23.11.2020 ^ top