|
|
 |
|
|
Reply confined to receivability (171,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Reply confined to receivability
Total judgments found: 12
Judgment 4374
131st Session, 2021
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the decisions to abolish their posts and terminate their appointments.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The ICC requested, and was authorized by the President of the Tribunal, to file a single reply and surrejoinder in relation to all complaints, and to confine its written submissions to the issue of receivability. The complainants assert that “[b]y limiting its submissions to receivability aspects, the Defendant Organisation elected not to defend itself on the merits” and that “[t]he direct and unavoidable consequence of the Defendant Organisation’s line of argumentation in the present case[s] is that, once satisfied that the present case[s] [are] receivable, the Tribunal shall determine on the merits of the present case[s] in light of the sole submissions made by the [c]omplainant[s], without need to reopen the written submissions”. The Tribunal notes that “[e]ven when the President has granted permission to reply only on receivability the Tribunal may still declare a complaint receivable and order further pleadings on the merits, as indeed it did in Judgment 852” (see Judgment 935, consideration 4). As the Tribunal has authorized the pleadings to be confined to the issue of receivability, this is the only issue that will be determined in the present judgment.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 852, 935
Keywords:
receivability of the complaint; reply confined to receivability;
Judgment 2525
100th Session, 2006
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The defendant sent the President of the Tribunal a letter requesting permission to confine its reply to the issue of the complaint's receivability. "For the sake of the good administration of justice [...] the President, who is authorised to direct proceedings (see Judgment 809), decided exceptionally to grant the Organization's request to confine its reply to the issue of receivability."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 809
Keywords:
discretion; exception; president of the tribunal; reply confined to receivability;
Judgment 1486
80th Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"When the defendant organisation submits a reply it must enable the Tribunal to render a complete ruling on the dispute. If it chooses to argue only procedural issues, that may - even if it does not so intend - amount to dilatory tactics that hold up the ruling, and the risk is that the Tribunal may treat the complainant's allegations of fact as established."
Keywords:
reply; reply confined to receivability; submissions;
Judgment 1102
71st Session, 1991
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complaint being plainly irreceivable, the EPO applied for and got leave from the Tribunal to confine its reply to receivability.
Keywords:
acceptance; reply confined to receivability; tribunal;
Judgment 935
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The complainant questions the impartiality of the President of the Tribunal on the grounds that the President allowed the EPO's application for permission to confine its reply to the issue of receivability. The President took that decision by virtue of his general authority to direct proceedings. Even when the President has granted permission to reply only on receivability the Tribunal may still declare a complaint receivable and order further pleadings on the merits, as indeed it did in Judgment 852."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 852
Keywords:
bias; competence of tribunal; procedure before the tribunal; recusal; reply confined to receivability; tribunal;
Judgment 930
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The organisation was authorised to confine its reply to the issue of receivability. But it was unable to show that it had given timely notice of the President's decision. The complaint is receivable.
Keywords:
burden of proof; case sent back to organisation; date of notification; decision; evidence; further submissions on the merits; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply confined to receivability;
Judgment 852
63rd Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Faced with the administration's failure to take action on the basis of the Appeals Committee's report, the complainant filed a complaint within the three-month time limit set by Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal. The final decision was later taken, after the expiry of the time limits in the Service Regulations. It follows that the organisation's objections to receivability must be dismissed. The proceedings shall resume on the merits.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case pending; case sent back to organisation; decision; failure to answer claim; further submissions on the merits; late decision; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; reply confined to receivability; tribunal;
Judgment 801
61st Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The complainant raises a preliminary objection to the authorisation the President of the Tribunal granted to the EPO to confine its reply to the issue of receivability. The plea fails because the President takes such a decision by virtue of his general authority to regulate proceedings before the Tribunal. Besides, the Tribunal may alter his decision at any time. There is therefore no reason why, as the complainant asks, the President should withdraw from the case."
Keywords:
competence; president of the tribunal; reply confined to receivability;
Judgment 574
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The Tribunal observes that the defendant is under a duty to enable the court to render a complete decision on the dispute. If the party who is the defendant takes the view that the complaint should be rejected because it is clearly vexatious, he may apply to the Tribunal, before filing the reply, for permission to confine his arguments to that point. Otherwise he will incur the danger that the Tribunal declare the allegations of fact in the complaint to be established."
Keywords:
acceptance; condition; consequence; organisation's duties; reply confined to receivability; submissions; tribunal;
Consideration 2
Extract:
The organisation committed an error of law by relying on res judicata and refusing to take up the case and consider the complainant's arguments during internal proceedings. The organisation argues the merits before the court only subsidiarily and very briefly, and it fails to answer most of the complainant's pleas.
Keywords:
reply confined to receivability; res judicata;
Summary
Extract:
The organisation pleads that the complaint fails by the doctrine of res judicata, in view of the fact that the complainant was an intervener in Judgment No. 365. The plea was dismissed on the grounds that the substance of the two claims was not the same: the first claim challenged a measure which had the force of a rule whereas the second concerned a decision of an individual nature. The case is referred back to the President for a new decision. The Tribunal stressed that the organisation should not have based its reply solely on res judicata, refraining from arguing the merits without having been granted permission to do so by the Tribunal.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 365
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; decision quashed; further submissions on the merits; general decision; individual decision; intervention; reply confined to receivability; res judicata; same purpose;
Judgment 522
49th Session, 1982
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 23
Extract:
An objection to receivability resting on the lateness of the complainant's internal appeal fails. The matter should be examined by the Internal Appeals Body on the merits. [The problem is one of copyright.] Compensation for "legal costs incurred to date. The other remedies requested do not arise for consideration at this stage."
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; costs; decision quashed; further submissions on the merits; reply confined to receivability;
Judgment 499
48th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The organisation confined itself to procedural issues. If the defendant considers the complaint to be clearly vexatious, it may apply to the Tribunal, before filing its memorandum, for permission to confine its arguments to the decisive point. "Otherwise [the defendant] will incur the danger that, instead of adjourning, as in the present case, the Tribunal declare the allegations of fact in the complaint to be established."
Keywords:
acceptance; case sent back to organisation; condition; further submissions on the merits; reply confined to receivability; tribunal;
Judgment 181
27th Session, 1971
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[T]he Director-General was at fault in ruling that the complainant's appeal to the Appeals Board was time-barred [...]. The decision impugned must accordingly be quashed." The case is referred back to the organization for a decision on the merits.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; decision quashed; further submissions on the merits; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; reply confined to receivability; time bar; tribunal;
|
|
|
|
|
