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

Implied decision (36, 37,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Implied decision
Total judgments found: 67

1, 2, 3, 4 | next >

  • 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 Tribunalís 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 4082


    127th Session, 2019
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the salary he receives at his new grade.

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    This complaint, which was originally directed against an implied decision to dismiss the complainantís internal complaint, must now be regarded as impugning the express decision of 27 April 2016, taken in the course of the proceedings, by which the Director General informed the complainant of his decision to dismiss his internal complaint of 28 January 2015 (for a similar case, see, for example, Judgment 3667, consideration 1).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3667

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; express decision; implied decision; impugned decision;



  • Judgment 4081


    127th Session, 2019
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision of the Director General not to allow him to carry out an assignment outside the Organisation.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    This complaint, which was originally directed against an implied decision to dismiss the complainantís internal complaint, must now be regarded as impugning the express decision of 29 July 2015, taken in the course of the proceedings, by which the Director General informed the complainant of his decision to reject the internal complaint against the aforementioned decision of 4 August 2014 (for a similar case, see, for example, Judgment 3667, consideration 1).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3667

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; express decision; implied decision; impugned decision;



  • Judgment 4018


    126th Session, 2018
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision no longer to pay him an expatriation allowance.

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    [The] complaint, which was initially directed against an implied rejection of the internal complaint which [the complainant] had filed against this measure, must now be regarded as impugning the express decision adopted on 28 January 2015, in the course of proceedings, by which the Director General dismissed this internal complaint as unfounded (see, for example, Judgments 3667, under 1, or 3925, under 2).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3667, 3925

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; implied decision; impugned decision;



  • Judgment 4016


    126th Session, 2018
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to extend his appointment beyond the mandatory retirement age.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The complaint, though initially directed against an implied rejection of an internal complaint, should now be viewed as challenging the express decision taken during the present proceedings, on 13 December 2016 (see, in particular, Judgment 3667, under 1).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3667

    Keywords:

    direct appeal to tribunal; express decision; implied decision; impugned decision;



  • Judgment 3957


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges an implied rejection of his request for review of a decision of the Administrative Council by the President of the Office.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; direct appeal to tribunal; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; summary procedure;



  • Judgment 3956


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant considers that there has been an implied decision to reject his request for review.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; direct appeal to tribunal; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; summary procedure;



  • Judgment 3955


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns an implied rejection of his request for review of a decision of the Administrative Council by the President of the Office.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; direct appeal to tribunal; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; summary procedure;



  • Judgment 3946


    125th Session, 2018
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the amounts she was awarded for the delay in processing her request for compensation for service-incurred illness.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    In Judgment 3089, at consideration 7, the Tribunal explained when a staff member may engage the internal appeal process on the basis of an implied decision. [...] " [...] An implied decision occurs only when a person who has submitted a claim is entitled to treat delay, inactivity or some other failure as constituting a decision to reject his or her claim and elects to do so. As there was no election by the complainant during the period in question, there was no implied decision at that time."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3089

    Keywords:

    implied decision;



  • Judgment 3884


    124th Session, 2017
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to extend her appointment beyond the mandatory retirement age.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The fact that the decision was purely implicit meant, by definition, that it was not accompanied by a statement of reasons.

    Keywords:

    implied decision; motivation;



  • Judgment 3506


    120th Session, 2015
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal of some of her requests for the defrayal of medical expenses.

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "As the Tribunal has consistently held in such circumstances, pursuant to Article VII, paragraph 3, of its Statute, the complainant could therefore impugn directly before the Tribunal the implied decision arising from the absence of an explicit decision at the end of the internal appeal proceedings (see, for example, Judgments 2070, under 5, 2562, under 5 and 6, and 2866, under 5)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2070, 2562, 2866

    Keywords:

    implied decision;



  • Judgment 3301


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant through five irreceivable complaints requested information concerning facts that occurred before his retirement for disability.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article 7, paragraph 2, of the Rules
    Organization rules reference: Articles 107, par. 2, and 109, par. 3, of the Service Regulations

    Keywords:

    decision; express decision; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted;



  • Judgment 3089


    112th Session, 2012
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "An implied decision occurs only when a person who has submitted a claim is entitled to treat delay, inactivity or some other failure as constituting a decision to reject his or her claim and elects to do so."

    Keywords:

    definition; failure to answer claim; implied decision;



  • Judgment 3060


    112th Session, 2012
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal has consistently held that the forwarding of the claim to the advisory appeal body constitutes a "decision upon [the] claim" within the meaning of [Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal], which is sufficient to forestall an implied rejection (see, for example, Judgment 2948, under 7, and the case law cited therein)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2948

    Keywords:

    claim; decision; iloat statute; implied decision; internal appeals body;



  • Judgment 3003


    111th Session, 2011
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 32

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal may at any time decide, when it renders a judgment, to defer the execution thereof if it considers such a measure justified (see Judgment 82 [...], under 5). It is therefore for the organisation concerned, if it seeks to have the execution of a judgment deferred in the event that it proves unfavourable to itself, to submit a subsidiary claim for that purpose. If the Tribunal did not order such a deferral in its decision, it must be deemed to have implicitly required the decision to be executed immediately, in conformity with the general rule, and it is therefore scarcely conceivable that an organisation could be allowed to request a stay of execution of the judgment at a later stage."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 82

    Keywords:

    claim; counterclaim; date; execution of judgment; implied decision; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 2948


    109th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "While Article VII, paragraph 3, of the [Tribunal's] Statute permits a complainant to have recourse to the Tribunal '[w]here the Administration fails to take a decision upon any claim of an official within sixty days from the notification of the claim to it', the Tribunal has consistently held that the forwarding of the claim to the advisory appeal body constitutes a 'decision upon [the] claim' within the meaning of these provisions, which is sufficient to forestall an implied rejection (see, for example, Judgments 532, 762, 786 or 2681)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 532, 762, 786, 2681

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; case law; date of notification; decision; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; refusal; time limit;



  • Judgment 2907


    108th Session, 2010
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "According to the Tribunal's case law, international organisations may undertake restructuring by reducing or reassigning their staff, even for the sole purpose of making budgetary savings (see, for example, Judgment 2156, under 8). However, each and every individual decision adopted in the context of such restructuring must respect all the pertinent legal rules and in particular the fundamental rights of the staff concerned."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2156

    Keywords:

    budgetary reasons; case law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; due process; implied decision; official; organisation; organisation's duties; reassignment; reorganisation; right; staff reduction; written rule;



  • Judgment 2901


    108th Session, 2010
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "As the Tribunal had occasion to explain in Judgment 456, under 2, the purpose of [the] provisions [of Article VII, paragraph 3, of its Statute] is twofold. Their first aim is to enable an official to defend his or her interests by going to the Tribunal when the Administration has failed to take a decision. Their second aim is to prevent a dispute from dragging on indefinitely, which would undermine the necessary stability of the parties' legal relations. It follows from these twin purposes that, if the Administration fails to take a decision on a claim within sixty days, the person submitting it not only can, but must refer the matter to the Tribunal within the following ninety days, i.e. within 150 days of his or her claim being received by the organisation, otherwise his or her complaint will be irreceivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 456

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; direct appeal to tribunal; iloat statute; implied decision; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties;

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal's case law [...] allow[s] a complaint against an implied rejection to be deemed receivable, notwithstanding the expiry of the time limit for filing a complaint, if a particular step taken by an organisation, such as sending a dilatory reply to the complainant, might give that person good reason to infer that his or her claim is still under consideration (see Judgment 941, under 6)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 941

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; good faith; implied decision; internal appeal; late appeal; late filing; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 2866


    108th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 4 and 5

    Extract:

    The complainant challenged the Organisation's decision not to grant her the expatriation allowance provided for in Article 72 (1) of the Service Regulations. The Tribunal held that she had failed to adduce cogent evidence that she fulfilled the requirements for the granting of the said allowance.
    "The EPO argues that although it was outside the time contemplated in Article 109(2) of the Service Regulations, a decision on the complainant's appeal was taken by the President and the appeal was forwarded to the Internal Appeals Committee prior to the complaint being filed. Accordingly, there was no longer an implicit rejection of the complainant's appeal and Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Tribunal's Statute does not apply. In its view, as the Tribunal held in Judgment 533, under 5, the complaint is irreceivable on the grounds that the internal means of redress have not been exhausted."
    "The EPO's reliance on Judgment 533 is misplaced. In the present case, by the EPO's own admission the decision was not taken within the time provided in Article 109(2) of the Service Regulations. As the Tribunal stated in Judgment 2562, under 6:
    "The EPO cannot be heard to argue that the complainant has failed to exhaust internal means of redress when the sole reason for his failing to do so was the EPO's own failure to abide by its own Service Regulations and to follow the timelines under Article 109(2). [...]"
    Accordingly, the complaint is receivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute
    Organization rules reference: Article 109(2) of the Service Regulations
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 533, 2562

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; direct appeal to tribunal; implied decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 2853


    107th Session, 2009
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 6, 7 and 8

    Extract:

    The difference as to the complainant's performance rating was not resolved in internal grievance proceedings and the complainant filed an internal appeal. Having received no response, the complainant sent an e-mail to the Registry of the Tribunal, stating that he wished to file a complaint.
    "It is fundamental that a litigant cannot pursue the same claim before different adjudicative bodies at the same time. Normally, the litigant will be forced to elect the forum in which he or she intends to proceed. That did not happen in the present case. Nonetheless, the complainant pursued his internal appeal to finality and, thus, must be taken to have elected to pursue internal remedies rather than to proceed at that stage before the Tribunal on the basis of an implied rejection of his internal appeal. However, that does not mean that the complaint is irreceivable."
    "[When] the complainant [decided] to pursue internal remedies [...], [his] complaint had already been filed and it was receivable pursuant to Article VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute. Moreover, he then had a cause of action, as his claim was not satisfied until 13 December 2007."
    "Even though the complaint became without object on 13 December 2007, it was receivable when filed and the complainant then had a cause of action. Accordingly, he is entitled, in these circumstances, to the costs associated with its filing, even though not requested in the complaint. However, he is not entitled to costs in respect of subsequent pleadings which were filed after his decision to pursue his internal appeal. There will be an award of costs in the amount of 500 Swiss francs, but the complaint must otherwise be dismissed."

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; costs; direct appeal to tribunal; duplication of proceedings; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;

1, 2, 3, 4 | next >


 
Last updated: 02.07.2020 ^ top