|
|
 |
|
|
Identical facts (54,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Identical facts
Total judgments found: 18
Judgment 4753
137th Session, 2024
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to place on his personnel file a letter notifying him that he had committed serious misconduct for which he would have been summarily dismissed had he not separated from the IAEA, and to relevantly inform all affected individuals.
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The question that arises is whether it is appropriate to join the two complaints. The touchstone for formal joinder has historically been that the complaints involve the same or, more recently, similar questions of fact and law, and it is not sufficient that they stem from the same continuum of events. A recent example is Judgment 4600, consideration 2. In that case, no joinder was ordered, notwithstanding that the complaints, the joinder of which was sought, concerned the same continuum of events. If the complaints concern the same or similar questions of fact and law, then it is probable that the same or related orders will be made dispositive of the several complaints.
In the present case, notwithstanding the linkage discussed earlier, the ultimate legal issues are quite different. At base, the first complaint requires a consideration of the legality of placing the letter of 17 December 2020 on the complainant’s personnel file. Any orders made, will address that question, unless the complaint is dismissed. At base, the second complaint addresses a different issue, namely the lawfulness of the decision to close the complainant’s harassment complaint, and again, any orders made, will address that question, unless the complaint is dismissed. Therefore, the two complaints will not be joined to form the subject of a single judgment, though they will be considered at the same session by the same panel of judges.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4600
Keywords:
identical facts; joinder; judgment of the tribunal;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
administrative decision; complaint dismissed; flaw; identical facts; investigation; joinder; personal file;
Consideration 3
Extract:
Plainly the Tribunal can, and often does, consider related complaints at the same session and by the same panel of judges. The joinder of two complaints is a legal device deployed by the Tribunal in order that one judgment can be rendered, and orders then made disposing of the joined complaints. When considering the scope and purpose of a joinder, it must be borne in mind that while such an order can be made in relation to multiple complaints by one complainant, they can also be made in relation to complaints by two or more individuals who, in substance, raise the same grievance. This latter situation illustrates the need for such orders to be made only in quite explicit circumstances and to be guided by focused principles and not loosely expressed generalities. This is particularly important given the res judicata effect of the Tribunal’s judgments. It would be wrong, in principle, to burden one individual with the legal outcome of proceedings where her or his complaint has been joined with the complaints of others in which legal issues have arisen and are resolved, but not legal issues raised by that individual.
Keywords:
finality of judgment; identical facts; joinder; judgment of the tribunal; order;
Judgment 3058
112th Session, 2012
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is well established that the same question cannot be the subject of more than one proceeding between the same parties. Accordingly, to the extent that these complaints raise the very same issue raised in the proceedings in respect of which the Tribunal has issued Judgment 3056, that aspect of the present complaints must be struck out."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3056
Keywords:
finality of judgment; identical claims; identical facts; parallel proceedings; res judicata; same parties;
Judgment 2944
109th Session, 2010
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
"[The] complaints, which contain some common claims and rest in part on the same arguments, are largely interdependent. The Tribunal therefore considers that they should be joined in order that they may form the subject of a single judgment."
Keywords:
complaint; condition; identical claims; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 2913
109th Session, 2010
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
WHO requests the joinder of two complaints.
"The Tribunal finds that the two complaints were filed by two different staff members against two decisions which, although they bear the same date and are couched in almost identical terms, concern these staff members individually. Having regard in particular to the fact that the complaints are directed against disciplinary measures, the Tribunal considers that it must refuse the request for joinder (see Judgment 2343, under 5)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2343
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; date; difference; disciplinary measure; exception; identical facts; individual decision; joinder; request by a party;
Judgment 1541
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"According to precedent complaints are to be joined only if they raise the same issues of fact and of law. The [complainant's] ninth and tenth complaints do rest on the same facts [...] and impugn the same decision, albeit each challenges a different part of it. But the issues of law are different [...] so the conditions for joinder are not met."
Keywords:
case law; complainant; complaint; condition; identical facts; joinder; refusal;
Judgment 1462
79th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The intervener offers no factual evidence to show that her duties entitled her to the allowance. She merely says that she is in the same position as two of the complainants. "She neither shows nor even seeks to show that she is in the same position in fact and in law as others who are claiming the allowance in complaints to the Tribunal. So her application is [...] irreceivable."
Keywords:
condition; identical claims; identical facts; intervention; receivability of the complaint; same purpose;
Judgment 1461
79th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Since the two complaints raise the same issues of fact and law and seek the same redress, they are therefore joined to form the subject of a single judgment."
Keywords:
complaint; identical claims; identical facts; joinder; same purpose;
Judgment 1277
75th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"According to the case law - see, for example, Judgment 435 [...] - the rule that the complainant must have exhausted the internal remedies means, first, that his complaint must rest on the same essential facts as his internal appeal and, secondly, that his claims must not be wider than those he put forward in that appeal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 435
Keywords:
case law; complaint; identical claims; identical facts; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1221
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
Since the three complaints before the Tribunal "are about the personal status of one official and the disputes arose out of the same facts, [the complainant's] application for joinder is allowed."
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; identical facts; joinder; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1189
73rd Session, 1992
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The principle of equal treatment applies only where staff in the same position both in law and in fact are shown not to have been treated alike."
Keywords:
equal treatment; general principle; identical facts;
Judgment 1053
69th Session, 1990
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The complaints rest on the same issues of fact insofar as the International Atomic Energy Agency's conduct is concerned and on substantially the same facts as far as the complainants' own circumstances are concerned and the issues of law are identical. The cases are therefore joined."
Keywords:
condition; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 666
56th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
In this case, "the complainants' pleas and claims are not stated in identical terms, but in substance their case is the same. [...] All three complainants are in the same factual position. [...] A further fact that is material, in view of the nature of their claims, is that all three are married and have children [...] The material issue in the three cases is in essence the same and the Tribunal will rule on the single legal issue which the three complaints raise."
Keywords:
claim; difference; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 663
56th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Before the Tribunal will join complaints and deal with them in a single judgment two conditions must be fulfilled. The first is that the substance of the claims must be the same. Whether they are stated differently is of no account: what matters is that the Tribunal should be able to rule on them in a single decision. The second condition is that the material facts, viz. those on which the claims rest and which are relevant thereto, should be the same. The complaints need not all contain the same arguments and rest on the same legal reasoning. The Tribunal rules as it sees fit and is not constrained by the parties' submissions."
Keywords:
application of law ex officio; condition; identical claims; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 657
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
For the Tribunal to join two or more complaints and deal with them in a single judgment, both the substance of the claims and the material facts should be the same. "The complainants need not all have the same arguments. The Tribunal rules as it sees fit and is not constrained by the parties' submissions, variations between them being immaterial."
Keywords:
condition; identical claims; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 656
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
Vide Judgment 657, consideration 1.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 657
Keywords:
condition; identical claims; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 626
54th Session, 1984
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The complaints "raise the same issues of fact and of law. [...] The Tribunal therefore joins the two cases and delivers a single judgment."
Keywords:
identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 391
43rd Session, 1980
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
Each of the complainants "has filed a complaint against the organisation and a rejoinder which [...] rest on the same facts and make the same pleas and claims. The [organisation] has filed a single reply and a single surrejoinder. The Tribunal will therefore join the complaints and give a single decision."
Keywords:
identical claims; identical facts; joinder;
Judgment 154
23rd Session, 1970
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The two complaints relate in part to the same facts and impugn decisions one of which is consequential to the other. In these circumstances the Tribunal must order the joining of the two complaints as proposed by the complainant."
Keywords:
complaint; identical facts; joinder;
|
|
|
|
|
