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

Confirmatory decision (27,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Confirmatory decision
Total judgments found: 41

1, 2, 3 | next >

  • Judgment 4121


    127th Session, 2019
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the alleged failure to implement a decision to grant him three years’ seniority.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The decision to promote the complainant was made in 2006. It was at that point in time that time-limits to challenge that decision began to run. The Tribunal’s case law concerning payslips does not entitle a complainant to belatedly challenge a decision out of time if the payslip is simply confirmatory of that decision (see, for example, Judgment 2823, consideration 10). This is what the complainant seeks to do in these proceedings. The complainant has not exhausted internal means of redress in conformity with the Service Regulations for permanent employees of the European Patent Office. Accordingly his complaint to this Tribunal is irreceivable and should be dismissed.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2823

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; individual decision; internal remedies exhausted; late appeal; new time limit; pay slip; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal;



  • Judgment 4118


    127th Session, 2019
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the findings of the Medical Committee according to which his invalidity is not of occupational origin.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    Even if the Tribunal were to accept to regard the claims in question as being directed against the [...] decision of 12 July 2007, they would still be irreceivable, since they would be time-barred. Indeed, it has been established that the complainant did not impugn the said decision before the Tribunal within the period of ninety days provided for in Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Tribunal’s Statute. The decision therefore became final, and the complainant could no longer seek to challenge it in his request of 30 April 2015, almost eight years later. As a result, on this issue, the implied decision of the President of the Office to reject that request must be considered as purely confirmatory of the earlier decision of 12 July 2007. As such, it could not set off a new time limit for an appeal by the complainant (see, for example, Judgments 698, consideration 7, 1304, consideration 5, 2449, consideration 9, or 3002, consideration 12).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 698, 1304, 2449, 3002

    Keywords:

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



  • Judgment 4052


    126th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to subject him to disciplinary proceedings after his separation from the EPO and to impose upon him the disciplinary measure of a reduction by one third in the amount of his retirement pension.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    With regard to the claim concerning the house ban, the Tribunal considers that it is irreceivable. In the 18 February 2016 decision, the President wrote: “[i]n view of the specific nature of your misconduct, you continue to remain at all times excluded from entering the EPO premises”. Considering the use of the phrase “you continue to remain”, the Tribunal finds that the 18 February 2016 letter merely confirms the continuance of a previous decision, which the President made at some earlier point in time, to impose a house ban on the complainant, and cannot be considered a new decision.

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision;



  • Judgment 3926


    125th Session, 2018
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who was recruited on 15 May 2000 as a student air traffic controller, challenges the application of provisions adopted after his recruitment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; confirmatory decision; internal remedies exhausted; time bar;



  • Judgment 3870


    124th Session, 2017
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant alleges that he was promised promotion to grade D-2.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    According to the case law of the Tribunal, for a decision, taken after an initial decision has been made, to be considered as a new decision (setting off new time limits for the submission of an internal appeal) and not a purely confirmatory decision, the following conditions are to be met: the new decision must alter the previous decision and not be identical in substance, or at least must provide further justification, and it must relate to different issues from the previous one or be based on new grounds (see Judgments 660, 2011, under 18, and 3735, under 4).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 660, 2011, 3735

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision;



  • Judgment 3296


    116th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant alleges that he has been harassed and that he was appointed only in 2006 to a post whose functions he had been fulfilling since 2001.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; confirmatory decision; new time limit;



  • Judgment 2887


    108th Session, 2010
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The letter of 19 December 2007 conveyed the Director- General's reasons and his final decision rejecting the complainant's internal appeal. The subsequent letter of 24 January 2008 did not alter that earlier decision and provided no new grounds for it. Accordingly, it did not give rise to new time limits (see Judgment 2011, under 18). As the complaint was not filed within ninety days of the notification of the final decision dated 19 December 2007, as required by Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Tribunal's Statute, it is irreceivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2011

    Keywords:

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



  • Judgment 2823


    107th Session, 2009
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "Although the complainant relies on his salary slips, that reliance is misplaced. It is correct, as pointed out in Judgment 1798, that «pay slips are individual decisions that may be challenged before the Tribunal». However, they cannot be challenged as new decisions if they merely confirm a decision that was taken at some earlier time and outside the time limits in which an appeal may be brought."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; decision; individual decision; new time limit; pay slip; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal;



  • Judgment 2244


    95th Session, 2003
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 6-7

    Extract:

    Although "the complainants learnt from [a communiqué], addressed to all staff [...], that their appeal had been rejected [...] they were officially notified of the dismissal of their appeals only in [subsequent] letters [...], receipt of which they were asked to acknowledge. Contrary to the argument of the defendant, that was not a confirmation, but the first official notification of the decision to reject the internal appeals they had filed."

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; date of notification; general decision; individual decision; information note; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar;



  • Judgment 2066


    91st Session, 2001
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "When an organisation hints that it will reconsider a decision affecting a staff member, it cannot reasonably expect the latter to challenge that decision. Nor may the staff member lodge an appeal against it unless the administration expressly states that the appeal procedure will take its course despite attempts to settle the case. In such instances, the rule that confirmation of an earlier decision sets off no new time limit for appeal does not apply."

    Keywords:

    case law; collective bargaining; confirmatory decision; decision; enforcement; exception; express decision; good faith; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 2011


    90th Session, 2001
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    "According to the case law of the Tribunal, for a decision, taken after an initial decision has been made, to be considered as a new decision (setting off new time limits for the submission of an internal appeal) the following conditions are to be met. The new decision must alter the previous decision and not be identical in substance, or at least must provide further justification, and must relate to different issues from the previous one or be based on new grounds (see Judgments 660 [...] and 759 [...]). It must not be a mere confirmation of the original decision (see Judgment 1304 [...]). The fact that discussions take place after a final decision is reached does not mean that the organization has taken a new and final decision. A decision made in different terms, but with the same meaning and purport as a previous one, does not constitute a new decision giving rise to new time limits (see Judgment 586 [...]), nor does a reply to requests for reconsideration made after a final decision has been taken (see Judgment 1528 [...])."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 586, 660, 759, 1304, 1528

    Keywords:

    case law; condition; confirmatory decision; cumulative decisions; decision; definition; formal requirements; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; same purpose; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 1983


    89th Session, 2000
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The complainant's contract was not extended. "It is true that the complainant was aware of the organization's intentions, having been informed of them several times, in particular, in a talk with the Director of the [organization's] service in France on 6 November 1997 and by the fax messages of 11 and 20 November 1997. Nevertheless, she was right to wait for official notification of an administrative decision from the competent authorities of [the organization] before challenging the measure. Although the letter of 16 January 1998 signed by the Director of the [organization's] service in France appears to be merely a letter of confirmation, it is the only official administrative decision adversely affecting the complainant. Her letter of 6 February 1998 seeking a review of it was therefore in time."

    Keywords:

    cause of action; confirmatory decision; decision; duty to inform; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; separation from service; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 1528


    81st Session, 1996
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The precedents are clear: "A reply to a further request for reconsideration is not a new decision setting off a new time limit for appeal. The complaint fails because it is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    case law; complaint; confirmatory decision; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;



  • Judgment 1490


    80th Session, 1996
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "The complainant is trying to [...] challenge the decisions [...] that have become final. In the absence of any new fact he may not challenge mere confirmation of those decisions."

    Keywords:

    complaint; confirmatory decision; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 1304


    76th Session, 1994
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The parties differ as to which decision set off the time limit for internal appeal. The complainant relies on negotiations which took place following an initial decision of the Secretary-General's. Those negotiations, intended to reach a settlement, ended in a second decision of the Secretary-General's to refuse to negotiate any further. The Tribunal holds that the complainant's "further action [...] and any proposals that may have been made to him did not cause the organization at any time to go back on the final decision which it had taken [...] [the subsequent decision] did no more than confirm the earlier one and set off no new time limit for appeal."

    Keywords:

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



  • Judgment 1148


    72nd Session, 1992
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 12-13

    Extract:

    Having submitted a claim for the refund of the costs of an item, the complainant first received a statement from the Sickness Fund which alluded to "non-refundable items". Only later did a note indicate which items were being refused. Eurocontrol contends that the time limit ran from the date at which she got the original statement from the Fund, the later note having merely confirmed the earlier decision. "The argument fails. The cryptic allusion in the statement to 'non-refundable items' did not suffice to tell the complainant just what she was being refused. The 'act adversely affecting' her - to quote the Regulations - did not become specific until she got the [note] and so that is the date at which the time limit for her internal appeal began. [...] She acted in time."

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; decision; health insurance; medical expenses; refund; start of time limit; 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 963


    66th Session, 1989
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    The complainants received notification in their pay slips of a 0.7 per cent reduction in the refundable amount of education expenses which they had incurred. The organisation contends that the pay slips merely confirmed earlier decisions, viz. a general decision of 7 July 1987. The Tribunal holds that the impugned decisions were individual ones that cause the complainants injury, and not confirmations of earlier decisions.

    Keywords:

    cause of action; confirmatory decision; decision; deduction; education expenses; general decision; individual decision; pay slip; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; refund; salary;



  • Judgment 922


    65th Session, 1988
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal set aside the original dismissal and ordered review. Compliance with its ruling calls for more than a bald affirmation that there has been further inquiry. The complainant ought to have been received and given his say, and the decision he is now challenging ought to have set out the findings of the further inquiry. Such response to the Tribunal's ruling is cavalier and unacceptable."

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; consequence; decision; flaw; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; right to reply;

    Summary

    Extract:

    In Judgment 868 the Tribunal quashed the decision to dismiss the complainant on the grounds of unsatisfactory performance and referred the case back to the Union. The organisation having merely confirmed its earlier decision without further inquiry, the new decision is set aside and "the Union shall pay the complainant damages equivalent to the sums he would have been paid had he remained on the staff from the date of his dismissal up to the date of this judgment."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 868

    Keywords:

    amount; confirmatory decision; material damages; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;



  • Judgment 759


    59th Session, 1986
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "With one exception any decision by the EPO may be challenged before the Tribunal as is prescribed in its Statute. The exception is a decision that merely confirms or reproduces the original one and is not based on any further inquiry or any new grounds. But there will be confirmation only if the later decision is identical in substance to the original one."

    Keywords:

    confirmatory decision; definition; receivability of the complaint; same purpose;

1, 2, 3 | next >


 
Last updated: 15.09.2021 ^ top