Internal appeal (86, 87, 668, 695, 752, 783,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Internal appeal
Total judgments found: 455
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 | next >
Judgment 347
40th Session, 1978
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant was promoted but granted no seniority at his new step. He failed to impugn that decision in time. Claiming that he had been less fairly treated than officials promoted in the meantime, the complainant submitted a further request to the Director-General, which was dismissed. Although the effect of that decision is the same as that of the first decision, it is an answer to the claim made by the complainant. "Since it is not merely confirmatory, it may be impugned before the Tribunal."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; internal appeal; promotion; receivability of the complaint; seniority; time bar;
Judgment 338
40th Session, 1978
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Assuming that the appeals filed by the complainant were receivable, the complainant "should in any event have appealed to the [appeals body] not later than thirty days after [the confirmation of the decision]. He did not appeal to the [appeals body] until [...] after the time limit had expired. The Director-General was therefore right to dismiss the appeal."
Keywords:
internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 336
40th Session, 1978
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Assuming that the letter in question constitutes a claim requiring a decision, sixty days had elapsed without a decision being taken by the organisation. "But a complainant is not thereby obliged to treat silence as an adverse decision. He may prefer to continue or to resume the correspondence in the hope of obtaining a favourable decision. If he continues or reopens the case in this way, he must wait for another period of sixty days' silence before he can treat his claim as rejected. Since the complainant has not obtained a final decision [...] the complaint is irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; failure to answer claim; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Considerations
Extract:
"Paragraph 3 of Article VII [of the Statute of the Tribunal] does not require a claim to be made in any particular form. There must however be a clear indication that the administration is being asked to take a decision; a letter whose object is to initiate a discussion will not do."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
formal requirements; internal appeal;
Judgment 333
40th Session, 1978
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The complainant appealed to the Director-General within the time limit for disputed claims. The Director-General dismissed her appeal by a letter which was not merely confirmatory. The complaint impugning that decision was filed within the time limit and is therefore receivable.
Keywords:
complaint; confirmatory decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 327
39th Session, 1977
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
A complainant may properly contend that the internal appeals bodies wrongly refused to hear an appeal submitted to them and that the complaint lodged with the Tribunal is therefore receivable. An organisation may correctly argue that those bodies acted improperly in ruling on the merits of an appeal and that the complaint is therefore irreceivable. "In ruling on such contentions the Tribunal does not [...] admit the receivability of the complaint itself but merely settles a preliminary point on which the receivability of the complaint depends."
Keywords:
complaint; consequence; internal appeal; internal appeals body; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 313
39th Session, 1977
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The chairman of the Appeals Committee having indicated that the proceedings were suspended, the complainant filed his complaint. Subsequently, the Director-General accepted the recommendation of the Committee and dismissed the appeal. "A party should not suffer prejudice from acting on even the mistaken suggestion of an appeals body. Having followed the suggestion in the chairman's letter, the complainant cannot be taken to task for acting too soon and failing to file his complaint again after [...] the [...] decision."
Keywords:
administrative delay; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal appeals body; late decision; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 305
38th Session, 1977
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Since no appeal lay to the Appeals Committee, the internal authority which took the decision was the last instance."
Keywords:
complaint; decision; decision-maker; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"According to Article VII of the Statute of the Tribunal a complaint shall not be receivable unless the internal means of redress have been exhausted and the complaint was filed within ninety days after the notification of the impugned decision. Hence only a final decision may prompt a complaint and the period of ninety days runs from the date of notification."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; date of notification; decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 277
37th Session, 1976
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The organisation maintains that the internal appeal was time-barred and therefore irreceivable. "According to Article VII, paragraph 1, of its Statute [the Tribunal] is required to consider merely whether the internal means of redress have been exhausted - in this case whether the Director-General's" original decision led to a recommendation by the Appeals Committee. That condition is undoubtedly fulfilled, and the complaint is therefore receivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; time bar;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"It is immaterial that the Appeals Committee may have erred in hearing the appeal. The fact is that it gave its views and consequently the complainant had recourse to the internal means of redress available to him."
Keywords:
consequence; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Although the Tribunal must determine whether its own time limit for filing a complaint has been respected, it will not review the observance of procedural rules in internal bodies. It merely notes that such bodies have heard the appeal. The most that can be said is that matters would have been different had the Director-General in his final decision expressed reservations on the propriety of the appeals procedure."
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 275
36th Session, 1976
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"It is not necessary to consider whether the internal time limit was respected since the Appeals Committee decided on the merits."
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal appeals body; mistaken hearing of merits; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 270
36th Session, 1976
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"According to Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal a complaint is receivable only if the complainant has exhausted all means of redress available to him under the staff regulations, i.e. the internal means of redress. Hence [...] staff members [of the defendant organisation] may lodge a complaint with the Tribunal only if within a period of three months they have submitted an appeal to the [competent] authority [...] as provided for [in the regulations]. Moreover, the complainant's claims for relief are receivable only if they fall within the scope of that appeal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
claim; complaint; condition; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"In view of the explanations which it contains, and in particular the reference to a circular subsequent to the notification [contested by complainant], the reply [by the organisation] is not a mere confirmation of that notification. In fact it is a new decision which gave rise to a new time limit for appeal."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 261
35th Session, 1975
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant claims an indemnity to cover the cost of travel expenses incurred in connection with the proceedings. "[T]he organization did not agree to pay these expenses, the expenses do not arise out of this claimant's terms of appointment and were not in the opinion of the Tribunal reasonably necessary for the presentation of his claims. This claim therefore fails on the merits."
Keywords:
complainant; internal appeal; internal appeals body; refund; request by a party; travel expenses;
Judgment 259
35th Session, 1975
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The decision in question, which merely upheld an earlier decision, could "not give rise to new time limits for the lodging of an appeal by the complainant."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; decision; internal appeal; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Considerations
Extract:
Under the applicable provision, the complainant had a period of six weeks in which to appeal against the decision which he regarded as detrimental. "No appeal having been lodged within that period, the decision had [...] become final [...] when the complainant asked for review of his case. The Secretary-General and subsequently the Appeal Board therefore acted lawfully in dismissing the request on that ground." No exceptional circumstances warranted a derogation from the prescribed time limits.
Keywords:
decision; internal appeal; mandatory time limit; receivability of the complaint; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 232
32nd Session, 1974
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[S]ince the complainant had let it be clearly understood that he would not attend the meeting and would be represented at it, the fact that he was not told of its exact date is immaterial to the propriety of the proceedings."
Keywords:
complainant; counsel; date; duty to inform; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; right to reply;
Judgment 223
31st Session, 1973
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant appealed to the Director against the decision to terminate his appointment. "He thus complied with the rule that an official must make a complaint to the Director of the organisation before filing a complaint with the Tribunal." The Director had the option under the Staff Regulations of referring the complaint to the internal body, but chose to reply to it.
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 221
31st Session, 1973
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The complainant does not allege that an obligation to pay the fees and expenses incident to an appeal is one of the terms of his appointment or the subject of any provision in the Staff Regulations [which contain no] general or implied obligation to pay costs. For this reason, the Tribunal is not competent to order the relief requested."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; counsel; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; refund;
Judgment 196
29th Session, 1972
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The appeal addressed to the Director-General was dismissed on 15 April. Whatever the date of the impugned decision, "the complainant could properly file an appeal as from 15 April [...] and consequently the claims he submitted to the Appeals Board on 27 April [...] were receivable. [H]ence the argument that the appeal was irreceivable affords no grounds for contending that the internal means of resisting the decision were not exhausted."
Keywords:
date; decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 186
27th Session, 1971
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Under the applicable provisions, "the period within which an appeal must be submitted against any administrative decision affecting [...] officials [of the organization] starts to run from the date of notification of the decision to the persons concerned." The rejection of the appeal for being time-barred is not flawed.
Keywords:
date; date of notification; decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar;
Judgment 185
27th Session, 1971
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant inquired whether a refusal decision was final. the absence of a reply from the administration must be considered, by virtue of a general rule of law, as a refusal of the claim. The complainant ought to have followed the procedure prescribed in the Staff Rules to secure "a decision by the Director-General, which decision could alone be impugned before the Administrative Tribunal." [The procedure provides for appeal at the regional level and subsequently at headquarters.]
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; enforcement; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; staff regulations and rules;
Considerations
Extract:
The regional administration failed to reply because it made a reply conditional on a matter unrelated to the request. "The position thus taken up by the administration misled [the complainant] and prevented him from following the procedure laid down [in the Staff Rules]. There is all the more reason for taking account of his error inasmuch as the [...] Rules do not mention the general rule of law [...] whereby the silence of the administration after a certain period is equivalent to rejection of a claim."
Keywords:
complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; negligence; organisation; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
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;
Consideration 4
Extract:
If the time limit had expired, "the Director-General could indeed have refused to consider the complainant's protest. However, the ruling given [...] on his instructions makes no reference to the expiry of the time limit. Failure to observe a time limit laid down by the [applicable provision] is not [a flaw] which can be pleaded at a later stage in the procedure."
Keywords:
flaw; internal appeal; mistaken hearing of merits; procedural flaw; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The date on which the appeal is despatched is the important one. "[I]n laying down that staff members must submit their appeal in writing to the [competent body] within 15 or 30 days, [the applicable provision] implies that the important one is that on which the appeal is despatched."
Keywords:
date; internal appeal; interpretation; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 175
26th Session, 1971
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The Appeals Committee, without giving any precise opinion on the points raised by complainant, merely proposed that he should be paid compensation, purely ex gratia. Consequently, although the chairman of the Advisory Committee on Compensation Claims which examined the case before the Director-General's first decision then sat as a member of the Appeals Committee, "this irregularity is not, in the circumstances of the case, such as to taint with illegality the Director-General's [...] decision."
Keywords:
advisory body; composition of the internal appeals body; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; lack of injury; procedural flaw;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 | next >
|
