Judgment No. 536
Decision
The applications are dismissed.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant applied for interpretation of Judgments 404 and 422. "The judgments being clear and unambiguous, the application is dismissed."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
application for interpretation; receivability of the complaint; condition
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant once again applied for review of Judgment No. 404 and Judgment No. 442 [which concerned the review of Judgment No. 404]. "Review is an exceptional procedure [...] The complainant may not put forward repeatedly the same pleas in favour of review. In the applications now before the Tribunal her pleas may be only such as she was unable to rely on in the first one or such as the Tribunal may have omitted to hear in Judgment No. 442."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
application for review; exception
Consideration 4
Extract:
Judgment No. 442 [a review of Judgment No. 404] contains no recapitulation of the facts; the procedure followed was the summary one, "and the complaint was not communicated to the [organisation] for reply. There being no exchange of memoranda, no purpose would have been served by summarising the facts and submissions in the complaint since in any event the Tribunal was required to review the whole case in order to answer the complainant's arguments."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
application for review; summary procedure; consequence
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Tribunal may apply the summary procedure "if it is detrimental neither to the complainant's interests nor to the defendant's to dispense with further memoranda. The Tribunal so decides at its own discretion, being alone competent to determine the procedure, and it is not a decision the complainant may object to."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
competence of tribunal; summary procedure; condition
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant contends that Judgment 442 overlooked one of her claims raised in the additional claims for relief in her third complaint. "The plea fails. The Tribunal gave a brief but adequate reply in paragraph 10 of its judgment when it said that it had no reason to alter its decision".
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 442
Keywords
application for review; omission to rule on a claim
Consideration 3
Extract:
"What is required is that the decision [...] should follow a line of reasoning which bears out the Tribunal's conclusions. The judgment deals with all the pleas put forward by the parties either by dealing with them on the merits or else by declaring them irrelevant or irreceivable [...] That is the obligation on a tribunal, and, for a judicial decision to be valid, that, but no further, obligation must be discharged."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
formal requirements; judgment of the tribunal
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Neither any general principle of law nor the Statute of the Tribunal nor its Rules of court lay down any particular formal requirements for the framing of its judgments."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
formal requirements; judgment of the tribunal
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The rule in Article VI[2] of the Statute that the reasons for a judgment shall be stated derives from a general principle. What is required is that the decision, be it to dismiss or to allow the complaint, should follow a line of reasoning which bears out the Tribunal's conclusions. The judgment deals with all the pleas put forward by the parties either by dealing with them on the merits or else by declaring them irrelevant or irreceivable. The parties cannot require the Tribunal to address itself to the merits of arguments which have no bearing on its decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VI, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
duty to substantiate decision; judgment of the tribunal
Consideration 6
Extract:
The application for the correction of alleged material errors is not admissible. The parties have discussed one of the matters raised in the previous cases; the others, for which there is not a shred of evidence, do not constitute new facts.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
application for review
Consideration 6
Extract:
"One of [the complainant's] arguments is that the Tribunal was not correctly constituted when it delivered Judgment No. 404" and that because of various other defects the judgment is null and void. "This is a plea she might have put forward in the written proceedings in her fourth complaint, which culminated in Judgment No. 442. It is therefore not admissible."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 404, 442
Keywords
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review; recusal; tribunal; composition of the internal appeals body
| 
