|
|
 |
|
|
Same cause of action (95,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Same cause of action
Total judgments found: 14
Judgment 3291
116th Session, 2014
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal dismisses fifty-six similar complaints on the grounds that they are directed against general and not individual decisions.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Articles 77,80, 81 and 83 of the Service Regulations; Circular No. 82; Decisions CA/D 32/08, 27/08, 14/08, 13/09, 28/09, 22/09, 7/10
Keywords:
advisory opinion; competence; complaint dismissed; decision; effect; general decision; general principle; individual decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; joinder; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; same cause of action; same purpose;
Judgment 2993
110th Session, 2011
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
Setting up of a pension fund to replace existing pension scheme and introduction of implementing measures.
"[T]he principle of '[r]es judicata operates to bar a subsequent proceeding if the issue submitted for decision in that proceeding has already been the subject of a final and binding decision as to the rights and liabilities of the parties in that regard'. The principle applies when the parties, the purpose of the suit and the cause of action are the same as in the earlier case (see Judgments 1216, under 3, and 1263, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1216, 1263, 2316
Keywords:
binding character; finality of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose;
Judgment 2782
106th Session, 2009
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
In order to execute Judgment 2560 the Organisation paid salary arrears not only to the officials who had filed the complaints that led to that judgment, but also to all other members of staff and to all former members of staff in receipt of a retirement pension.
"It is not disputed that only the parties to the proceedings leading to the delivery of Judgment 2560 could seek its enforcement. But this does not mean that that judgment remains without effect for staff members who, although they did not participate in those proceedings, are de facto in a situation identical to that of colleagues who did. It is clear from Judgment 2560 that the Organisation breached the provisions of the Staff Regulations by not taking any measure to adjust salaries and pensions for the period under consideration. Staff members who were not party to the proceedings are entitled, for the same reasons as those stated in the judgment, to receive the salary arrears paid to the staff members who participated in those proceedings, provided that they are in the same situation.
Consequently, in deciding to extend the scope of Judgment 2560 to all serving or retired members of staff, the Organisation [...] perform[ed] a legal obligation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2560
Keywords:
adjustment; breach; complainant; effect; execution of judgment; grounds; limits; organisation's duties; payment; pension; purport; res judicata; retirement; right; salary; same cause of action; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2316
96th Session, 2004
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"Res judicata operates to bar a subsequent proceeding if the issue submitted for decision in that proceeding has already been the subject of a final and binding decision as to the rights and liabilities of the parties in that regard. It extends to bar proceedings on an issue that must necessarily have been determined in the earlier proceeding even if that precise issue was not then in dispute. In such a case, the question whether res judicata applies will ordinarily be answered by ascertaining whether one or other of the parties seeks to challenge or controvert some aspect of the actual decision reached in the earlier case."
Keywords:
complaint; decision; definition; enforcement; finality of judgment; general principle; intention of parties; judgment of the tribunal; judicial review; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; res judicata; right; same cause of action; same purpose; settlement out of court; staff member's duties; tribunal;
Judgment 2220
95th Session, 2003
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant is asking for the execution of a judgment in which he was neither a party nor an intervener. He "claims that [that] judgment constitutes an exception to the general rule of res judicata because it is of "general" application. There is no such exception to the rule. The judgments of the Tribunal operate only in personam and not in rem. Notwithstanding the generality of the terms in which the Tribunal may dispose of a case before it, the judgment has effect only as between the parties to it. The complainant confuses the rule of res judicata with the rule of stare decisis. The former, which is a rule of law, applies absolutely when the necessary three identities of person, cause and object are present, which is not the case here. the latter rule, which is simply a matter of judicial practice or of comity, holds that, in general, the Tribunal will follow its own precedents and that the latter have authority even as against persons and organisations who were not party thereto, unless it is persuaded such precedents were wrong in law or in fact or that for any other compelling reason they should not be applied."
Keywords:
binding character; case law; complainant; effect; enforcement; exception; execution of judgment; general principle; grounds; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; limits; mistake of fact; organisation; practice; purport; request by a party; res judicata; right; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose; status of complainant;
Judgment 1980
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5 and 10
Extract:
"The complainants contend that Judgment 1663 was not properly executed. According to a general principle, a judgment ordinarily affects only the parties to the suit and applies only to the issues raised in it. The Tribunal has applied that principle in judgments concerning monetary claims by staff members of organisations (see Judgment 1935, [...] under 4 to 6). The complainants were not parties to the proceedings that led to Judgment 1663 and so are not entitled to benefit from it unless they can invoke some special ground."
The complainants were unable to do so. Therefore the Tribunal found that, "having no locus standi to apply for the execution of Judgment 1663, the complainants cannot plead that the execution of the judgment was formally flawed."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1663, 1935
Keywords:
execution of judgment; flaw; formal flaw; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties;
Judgment 1978
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"An application for execution may only address issues covered by the initial judgment, which carries the authority of res judicata (see Judgment 1887 [...] under 8)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1887
Keywords:
application for execution; general principle; res judicata; same cause of action;
Judgment 1263
75th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The res judicata rule will apply where the parties, the purpose of the suit and the cause of action are the same as in the earlier case."
Keywords:
definition; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose;
Judgment 1216
74th Session, 1993
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"There are three conditions for sustaining [irreceivability under the res judicata rule]: the parties, the purpose of the suit and the cause of action must be the same as in the earlier case."
Keywords:
case law; definition; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose;
Consideration 4
Extract:
Among the conditions which the Tribunal sets out for pleading res judicata is cause of action. "What the cause of action means is the foundation of the claim in law. It is not the same thing as the pleas, which are submissions on issues of law or of fact put forward in support of the claim. [...] In many instances the question will be whether the complainant's line of argument does not show some direct link with the earlier case." This entails determining whether the complainant's claim has "the same foundation in law as the claims dismissed in earlier judgments".
Keywords:
cause; definition; res judicata; same cause of action;
Judgment 879
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 13-14
Extract:
"The res judicata rule applies to an intervener because by the very act of intervening he espouses the complainant's case. It is true that there are some arguments which he puts forward again and which those judgments did not address. But that does not mean that the conditions [...] for applying the res judicata rule are not met: between this case and the earlier ones there is identity in the parties, in the purpose of the suit and in the cause of action."
Keywords:
consequence; effect; intervention; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose;
Judgment 860
63rd Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
As to identity in the cause of action, Mr [A.] notes that the Tribunal had in part rejected the complainants' plea of breach of good faith on the grounds that they had taken up duty after the new criteria had taken effect. Mr [A.] contends that this reasoning does not apply to him insofar as he had taken up duty before the change in rules. The Tribunal acknowledges that there is on this point a new cause of action; however it holds on the merits that a staff member has no right, save in exceptional cases, to demand that the rules on promotion in force at the time of appointment should never be modified.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 657
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; application for review; appointment; date; effective date; general principle; good faith; practice; promotion; provision; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; terms of appointment;
Judgment 812
61st Session, 1987
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"Identity in the cause of action relates to the foundation of the claim in law. The cause of action is not the same thing as the pleas, which are submissions on issues of law or of a fact put forward in support of the claim."
Keywords:
res judicata; same cause of action;
Judgment 574
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
Where a plea of res judicata "is upheld the effect is to preclude a further ruling on claims identical in substance to claims on which the Tribunal has already passed judgment. Where the earlier complaint was dismissed the doctrine of res judicata will apply if three conditions are fulfilled": that the parties must be the same, that the substance of the claim should be the same and that the cause of action should be the same.
Keywords:
condition; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose;
Judgment 209
30th Session, 1973
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"The present claim is entirely different in origin and purpose from the complaints settled by [...] Judgement [No. 61]. It follows that [the complainant] cannot properly rely on the decision given in that judgment."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 61
Keywords:
res judicata; same cause of action; same purpose;
|
|
|
|
|
