Judgment No. 570
Decision
1. THE APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS NOS. 507 AND 508 IS DISMISSED.
2. THE APPLICATION THAT THE SUMS ORDERED TO BE PAID BY THE SAID JUDGMENTS SHALL BE PAID IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY IS DISMISSED.
3. THE ORGANISATION SHALL PAY $500 TO EACH RESPONDENT AS COSTS.
Summary
Extract:
The organisation applied for review of Judgments 507 and 508. The application was dismissed for failing to show the existence of exceptional circumstances needed to justify it. The application for review was dismissed. Each respondent is awarded costs.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
application for review; costs; application filed by the organisation
Consideration 8(1)
Extract:
"A review is normally confined to the facts in the dossier of the case whose judgment is being submitted for review. It is useless for the applicant to refer to facts outside the dossier unless he introduces them specially as new facts and justifies their introduction accordingly."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
application for review; purport
Consideration 8(3)
Extract:
"It is useless to present an application which in substance is inviting the Tribunal to have second thoughts. If it can have second thoughts, it can also have third and fourth thoughts and there can be no finality. To displace the principle of finality, the applicant must show the exceptional case in which insistence upon it would be unjust."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
application for review; res judicata; exception
Consideration 7
Extract:
In the "judgment submitted for review, the Tribunal stated that the effect of certain decisions of the [National Supreme Court] was 'summed up [...] in terms which the organisation does not dispute'. The organisation, while not denying that it failed to challenge the summary, wishes now to dispute it and to put in evidence the opinions of experts who take the contrary view. This is not permissible."
Keywords
application for review; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; new claim; application filed by the organisation
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The principle of finality is vital to the administration of justice but judges are human and can make slips and the principle does not go so far as to require that errors arising through accident or inadvertence or the like can never be corrected; if it went as far as that, the principle could be made an instrument of injustice. [Article VI of the Statute of the Tribunal] does not therefore preclude the exercise of a limited power of review."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VI OF THE STATUTE
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
finality of judgment; res judicata; judgment of the tribunal
Consideration 9
Extract:
Under the principle of res judicata the consequences of the decision are strictly limited to the three former employees.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
res judicata; judgment of the tribunal; effect
Consideration 8(3)
Extract:
"To displace the principle of finality, the applicant must show the exceptional case in which insistence upon it would be unjust. Such is the case of a 'new' fact which the applicant could not reasonably be expected to have discovered in time. Such also is the case of a 'slip' where, as it is sometimes put, 'even homer nods'. Such cases are likely to be very rare and it is likely also that they can be presented without any elaborate argument."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
application for review; finality of judgment; material error; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; exception; judgment of the tribunal
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The plea correctly regards [the national] law as a question of fact. It is not binding on the Tribunal and its relevance in this case is not an aid to the interpretation of the contract between the parties."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
tribunal; applicable law; domestic law; enforcement; interpretation; contract
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The organisation pleads [...] that the Tribunal omitted to take account of material facts. In support of such a plea, the organisation should [1] particularise each fact that was ignored; [2] identify the passages in the dossier which show that the organisation was relying upon the fact; [3] demonstrate from the terms of the judgment submitted for review that the Tribunal could not have reached the conclusion it did if it had taken the fact into account."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
application for review; condition
Consideration 10
Extract:
The procedure "open to an applicant or complainant when the surrejoinder contains an irregularity or states a material fact not previously mentioned which the applicant/complainant wishes to challenge [...] is [...] to notify the registrar without any accompanying argument that he objects to the irregularity or disputes the fact, as the case may be. If then the Tribunal considers that further pleadings are necessary, the President will notify the parties in accordance with Article 9(2) of the Rules."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 9, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE RULES
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
procedure before the tribunal; further submissions; iloat statute; additional written submissions
Consideration 2
Extract:
The power of review may be exercised in cases of "an omission to take account of particular facts; a material error involving no exercise of judgment and therefore distinguishable from misappraisal of fact which does not warrant review; an omission to pass judgment on a claim; and the discovery of a so-called 'new' fact [...] an error within these categories constitutes a basis for the exercise of the power to review."
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 507, 508
Keywords
application for review; admissible grounds for review
| 
