Reasonable time (115,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Reasonable time
Total judgments found: 73
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
Judgment 2072
91st Session, 2001
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"The appeal procedure was inordinately long: the case was before the Committee for two years, yet it was not a very difficult one and it needed to be settled promptly [...] In these circumstances, the delay in resolving it amounts to negligence warranting compensation. The Tribunal therefore considers that the complainant is entitled to redress, and it sets the amount at 3,000 United States dollars."
Keywords:
administrative delay; amount; internal appeals body; misconduct; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; right; submissions;
Judgment 2039
90th Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Precedent says that the requirement to exhaust the internal remedies cannot have the effect of paralysing the exercise of the complainants' rights. Complainants may therefore go straight to the Tribunal where the competent bodies are not able to decide on an issue within a reasonable time, depending on the circumstances (see Judgments 1829, [...], 1968, [...], and the numerous judgments cited therein). However, a complainant can make use of this possibility only where he has done his utmost, to no avail, to accelerate the internal procedure and where the circumstances show that the appeal body was not able to reach a decision within a reasonable time (see, for example, Judgments 1674, [...] under 6(b), and 1970 [...]). In general, a request for information on the status of the proceedings or the date on which a decision may be expected is enough to demonstrate that the appellant wants the procedure to follow its normal course, and gives grounds for alleging unjustified delay if the authority has not acted with the necessary diligence. However, there are circumstances in which it is unclear whether the procedure has been abandoned or whether the staff member has implicitly consented to the suspension of his appeal in law or in fact. In such cases, the case law says that the staff member must indicate clearly if he wants the procedure to continue. For example, the Tribunal found in one case that a staff member had not met this requirement because an internal appeal he had filed was not referred to the internal appeals body of the organisation, the administration having taken steps to reach an agreed settlement to the dispute. As the staff member had not sought the continuation or renewal of the procedure, it was found that he had not pursued his appeal "diligently" and so did not qualify to file a complaint directly with The tribunal (see Judgment 1970). Similarly, in a case in which the internal appeal had been followed by negotiations in order to reach a settlement, it was found that the staff member was not justified in turning to the Tribunal without first indicating either that the procedure should follow its course in parallel with the negotiations or that it should be taken up again without further ado, and then waiting a reasonable time to see what happened (see Judgment 1674 under 6(b))."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1674, 1829, 1968, 1970
Keywords:
administrative delay; case law; delay; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; time limit;
Judgment 1970
89th Session, 2000
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"A complainant cannot sit back and do nothing when an appeal is lodged. He must pursue the appeal diligently. Only then can he claim that delay is unreasonable. In the present case, the complainant failed to exhaust the means of internal appeal because he did not pursue his appeal diligently; therefore, he does not qualify to bring a direct appeal to the Tribunal."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complaint; delay; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; time limit;
Judgment 1968
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Receivability falls to be determined at the time that a complaint is filed, not at some later date. As at 29 July 1999 the complainant had done all that could be reasonably expected of him. He had filed his appeal in time. Approximately a year later he wrote to enquire about its progress and had been informed that the administration had done nothing but would move forward as soon as possible. He filed his complaint just over four months later having heard nothing further from the administration. At that time almost twenty months had elapsed since the original challenged decision had been published. The administration's plea that it had a heavy backlog of internal appeals to deal with may be a reason for the inordinate delay, but it is not an excuse. As at 29 July 1999, it was simply not reasonable to expect the complainant to wait any longer to see even the beginning of the end of the internal appeal procedure. If the organisation was overloaded with internal appeals, it was for it to remedy the situation rather than expect the complainant to bear the consequences."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; complaint; delay; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1952
89th Session, 2000
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3-4
Extract:
"Consistent precedent has it that the Tribunal's judgments are final and without appeal and that they carry the authority of res judicata. It is only in quite exceptional circumstances that an application for review, although not provided for in the Statute, can be allowed: the only grounds which may be entertained are failure to take account of particular facts, a mistaken finding of fact that involves no exercise of judgment, omission to rule on a claim and the discovery of some new facts which the complainant was unable to invoke in time in the proceedings which led to the judgment which the complainant is seeking to reverse. The application for review should also be filed within a reasonable time and the pleas put forward should be of such a nature as to affect the original ruling. [...] In the present case, the Tribunal finds that none of the grounds exist for challenging the ruling already made[: the] application for review was only filed more than one year after the adoption of the judgment that she is challenging [...] The complainant now merely calls into question the conclusions reached by the Tribunal. [A] form, which she says constitutes a new fact, had already been sent to her counsel [...] during the internal appeals procedure. [Finally, the plea] that she was not assisted effectively by her former counsel [...] does not warrant review of the Tribunal's judgment."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1727
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; counsel; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; omission to rule on a claim; reasonable time; res judicata; time-limit for filing an application for review;
Judgment 1946
88th Session, 2000
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Consistent precedent has it that only in exceptional circumstances may the requirement to exhaust the internal remedies be set aside, and only in cases where on the evidence the organization seems unlikely to reach a decision within a reasonable time."
Keywords:
administrative delay; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; time limit;
Judgment 1833
86th Session, 1999
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"the Tribunal holds that the complaints before it are clearly irreceivable. The complainant has not exhausted his internal remedies and has not given the [organization] sufficient time to respond to those matters which have formed the subject of his internal claims. [A] complainant who changes the form and content of his internal claims cannot lay on his employer the responsibility of replying to an original set of claims while still retaining whatever benefits may flow to him from an amended one."
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1829
86th Session, 1999
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-8
Extract:
"The complainant asks the Tribunal to review [an administrative decision] notwithstanding that the internal appeal procedure has not been completed. The Tribunal's case law has it that where the pursuit of the internal remedies is unreasonably delayed the requirement of Article VII(1) will have been met if, though doing everything that can be expected to get the matter concluded, the complainant can show that the internal appeal proceedings are unlikely to end within a reasonable time. [The Tribunal refers to the case law.] The complainant's internal appeal was received by the organisation on 16 April 1997. Her statement is lengthy and has 24 annexes. Less than a month later the Vice-President completed his initial assessment of her claims and referred the matter to the Appeals Committee. She filed this complaint just over three months later. The Tribunal holds that at the date of filing the present complaint the internal appeal process had not been unreasonably delayed and there was no indication that it was unlikely to come to an end within a reasonable time."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case law; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1684
84th Session, 1998
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Tribunal's Statute says that for a complaint to be receivable the internal remedies must have been exhausted. But precedent has it that, if there is delay over the final decision, the requirement will be met provided that the complainant has done everything that might be expected of him to get one but the appeal proceedings are unlikely to end within a reasonable time. [...] The requirement was plainly met in this case. Having done all that he did, to no avail, the complainant could not reasonably be required to wait any longer, there being no grounds for expecting the Appeals Committee to report soon. The organisation's domestic difficulties in running its appeal procedure afforded no excuse for denying him due process."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
administrative delay; case law; condition; exception; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time;
Judgment 1674
84th Session, 1998
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6(B)
Extract:
"Where the decision-making authority tarries over an appeal, the internal procedure must be deemed exhausted when the complainant has done his utmost to get things going yet no decision is likely reasonably soon" (see Judgments 1243, 1404, 1433, 1486 and 1534).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1243, 1404, 1433, 1486, 1534
Keywords:
administrative delay; complaint; exception; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1486
80th Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"It is true that Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute requires a complainant, before he files suit with the Tribunal, not just to apply for internal review but also to await the outcome of the internal proceedings. Yet that is not a hard-and-fast rule, even though the Statute does not allow any express derogation. If a complainant does his utmost to procure a decision, and if nevertheless the internal appeals body evinces by its statements or conduct an intention not to report within a reasonable time, justice requires that an exception be made. A mere failure to proceed with all proper speed and diligence is not enough: it is only if the proceedings have been so protracted that the delay is inordinate, unexplained and inexcusable that such an intention will be inferred: see Judgments 408 [...] and 451 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VII(1) of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 408, 451
Keywords:
administrative delay; case law; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The complainant had done everything in his power to exhaust his internal remedies and [at a certain date] it was quite clear that the internal process of review would not be concluded within a time which the Tribunal may regard as reasonable in the circumstances. [...] The complaint is therefore receivable."
Keywords:
administrative delay; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1433
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Article VII (1) of the Tribunal's Statute requires that for a complaint to be receivable the complainant must have 'exhausted such other means of resisting a final decision as are open to him under the applicable staff regulations'. The Tribunal recognises that reasonable time must be allowed for completing the internal appeal procedure. Yet in this case [fifteen months had passed between the date of the complainant's internal appeal and the organization's response to the appeal] objections to receivability ill become the defendant".
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; date; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; reply;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant was kept waiting over sixteen months [...] for an answer to his request [...] and fifteen months for the [organisation] to file its reply [...] to his appeal [...] and so let the internal appeal procedure go ahead. The Tribunal holds that since he took all the steps he could take to obtain a final decision and since the [organisation] failed to discharge promptly its obligations under the internal procedure he was justified in coming to the Tribunal. That is in keeping with what the Tribunal ruled in, for example, Judgment 1243 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1243
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; date; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; reply;
Judgment 1404
78th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant appealed to the Headquarters Appeals Board before the Regional Board had issued its report. "The complainant's own behaviour affected the regional proceedings and made for delay in the Regional Board's report and recommendation to the Regional Director. Not to be ignored either is the effect of the change in membership, which fell within the time allotted for hearing the case. On the evidence the complainant has failed to show that the Board did not intend to report within a reasonable time."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; composition of the internal appeals body; delay; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; time limit;
Judgment 1344
77th Session, 1994
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"It is true that Article VII(1) of the Statute provides that a complaint will not be receivable unless the complainant has exhausted such other means of resisting the decision as are open to him under the applicable Staff Regulations. But it is plain from the case law that the Tribunal construes that article to mean that when a complainant has done all that is required of him to get a final decision, yet the proceedings appear unlikely to be concluded within a reasonable time, he may appeal directly to the Tribunal".
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 451, 499
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1243
74th Session, 1993
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"According to the case law, where a complainant does everything necessary to get a final decision but the appeal proceedings appear unlikely to end within a reasonable time, he may go to the Tribunal. Rulings to that effect are to be found, for example, in Judgments 451 and 499."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 451, 499
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; decision; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1195
73rd Session, 1992
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complainant having received undue payment, the Union claimed a refund. The complainant challenges this on the grounds that "because of prescription the debt has become unenforceable. There is indeed a widely recognised principle that lapse of time may extinguish an obligation, but the difficulty here is that the Union's rules set no time limit for such extinctive prescription." However the Tribunal holds that the time between the payment of the material sums and the Union's request for their repayment "was not long enough to warrant declaring the undue payments irrecoverable. Not only is the period of extinctive prescription much longer in most national systems of law, but the complainant pleads no personal difficulty or hardship in making repayment: the Union is not claiming lump-sum reimbursement but is spreading it over eighteen months."
Keywords:
debt; domestic law; reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; refund; time limit;
Judgment 1064
70th Session, 1991
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2, Summary
Extract:
On 3 April 1990 the complainant filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 972, which was delivered on 27 June 1989. Neither the Statute nor the Rules of Court set any time limit for the filing of such applications (see Judgment 538). The Tribunal will look at the circumstances in which a claim is made before deciding what constitutes a reasonable time. In the instant case the complainant is not guilty of such delay as to make his application irreceivable.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 538
Keywords:
application for interpretation; no provision; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1046
69th Session, 1990
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant was transferred on 1 February 1988. On 5 February he got notice that his contract would not be renewed because of an unsatisfactory report concerning his new assignment. The Tribunal holds that "it was incumbent on the [organization] to give him a fair trial in the job, and [...] to ask after the lapse of only four days for an immediate replacement was to act with undue haste."
Keywords:
contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reasonable time; time limit; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
Judgment 857
63rd Session, 1987
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Tribunal has said there must be reasonable notice of non-renewal, with due regard to the particular circumstances of each case. But she was well warned, for the first time orally over a year before expiry and in writing fifty days before, that her appointment would not be renewed."
Keywords:
contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; reasonable time; time limit;
Judgment 791
60th Session, 1986
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"[T]he rule [by which receivability hinges on the official's having exhausted the internal means of redress] is not a hard-and-fast one, even though the Statute does not expressly allow any derogation from it. The derogation should in all fairness be allowed if the complainant has done his utmost to obtain a decision, but on the evidence a decision seems unlikely to be taken in reasonable time."
Keywords:
exception; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
|
