Res judicata (94, 95, 96, 97,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Res judicata
Total judgments found: 155
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Judgment 604
52nd Session, 1984
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant invites the Tribunal to correct the material error in Judgments nos. 404, 442 and 536. The Tribunal recalls that a complainant may not submit the same pleas for review more than once. It first seeks to determine whether Judgment no. 536 suffers from any defects which would cause it to be set aside and which could then require the other judgments to be reconsidered. The Tribunal finds that Judgment no. 536 does not overlook the complainant's claims, contrary to her allegations, and is therefore not admissible for review. The complainant's criticism of the Tribunal's appraisal of the claims and certain facts in the case serves no purpose and is not an admissible ground for review.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404, 442, 536
Keywords:
application for review; material error; res judicata;
Judgment 574
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The organisation committed an error of law by relying on res judicata and refusing to take up the case and consider the complainant's arguments during internal proceedings. The organisation argues the merits before the court only subsidiarily and very briefly, and it fails to answer most of the complainant's pleas.
Keywords:
reply confined to receivability; res judicata;
Summary
Extract:
The organisation pleads that the complaint fails by the doctrine of res judicata, in view of the fact that the complainant was an intervener in Judgment No. 365. The plea was dismissed on the grounds that the substance of the two claims was not the same: the first claim challenged a measure which had the force of a rule whereas the second concerned a decision of an individual nature. The case is referred back to the President for a new decision. The Tribunal stressed that the organisation should not have based its reply solely on res judicata, refraining from arguing the merits without having been granted permission to do so by the Tribunal.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 365
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; decision quashed; further submissions on the merits; general decision; individual decision; intervention; reply confined to receivability; res judicata; same purpose;
Consideration 2
Extract:
The condition that the parties should be the same is met here: "Although Mr. [H.] was not a complainant in the case in which the Tribunal gave judgment [...] He was an intervener, the Tribunal declared the intervention receivable, and it dismissed the applications to intervene together with the complaints. Mr. [H.] was therefore party to those proceedings."
Keywords:
effect; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; res judicata; same parties;
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 570
51st Session, 1983
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
Under the principle of res judicata the consequences of the decision are strictly limited to the three former employees.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 507, 508
Keywords:
effect; judgment of the tribunal; res judicata;
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)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 507, 508
Keywords:
application for review; exception; res judicata;
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
ILOAT Judgment(s): 507, 508
Keywords:
finality of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; res judicata;
Judgment 553
50th Session, 1983
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The Tribunal's judgments have the authority of res judicata. An [...] organisation [...] is therefore bound [...] first and foremost to take whatever action the judgment may require. That the judgment must be both respected and executed are thus principles which are beyond dispute, and they apply, in particular, where the organisation is ordered to pay a sum of money. The debtor's obligation to pay must as a rule be discharged immediately unless the judgment states that the sum shall be payable only at some later date."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 463
Keywords:
execution of judgment; formal demand for payment; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; res judicata; time limit;
Judgment 550
50th Session, 1983
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
Judgment No 450 "did not dispose of the question of the repayment of the medical expenses the [organisation] had agreed to bear, and [the judgment] does not have the authority of res judicata on this matter. In fact both the [Appeals] Board and the Director were required to take the matter up. The Director's refusal to consider the claim to repayment of medical expenses therefore suffers from a mistake of law and on this point the impugned decision must be set aside."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 450
Keywords:
flaw; health insurance; internal appeal; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; res judicata;
Judgment 510
49th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Although there is no provision in the Tribunal's Statute or Rules of court for an application for the review of its judgments, such an application may be made. It will, however, be receivable only if certain conditions are fulfilled, and one is that it may not rest on facts on which the applicant might have relied years earlier. To enlarge the scope for review in that way would encourage unsuccessful complainants to make repeated attempts to get the Tribunal to review its judgments, in disregard of the principle of res judicata."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 309
Keywords:
application for review; exception; no provision; res judicata;
Judgment 467
47th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant "is now pursuing a claim which [was] dismissed in Judgment No. 395, and his present complaint thus appears to be an application for review of that judgment. He is relying on what he alleges to be a new situation. In fact it is not: the Tribunal was not unaware of it in delivering Judgment No. 395, and indeed referred to it. Nevertheless the complainant's claim [...] was dismissed. There is no reason to grant him now what he was not granted before: the matter is res judicata."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 395
Keywords:
application for review; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; res judicata;
Judgment 442
46th Session, 1981
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The Tribunal's judgments carry the authority of res judicata from the date on which it delivers them. Though subject to review thereafter, they will be reviewed only in exceptional cases. that is the rule under all judicial systems which allow review."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; date; exception; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; mistake of law; res judicata;
Consideration 2 and 8(B)
Extract:
Among inadmissible grounds for review is alleged mistaken appraisal of the facts, i.e. the interpretation which the Tribunal has put on the facts. Parties who are dissatisfied with a decision may not question it indefinitely in disregard of the principle of res judicata.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; appraisal of facts; definition; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; misinterpretation of the facts; res judicata;
Consideration 2
Extract:
"To allow an application for review on the grounds of the Tribunal's legal reasoning would be to permit anyone who was dissatisfied with a decision to question it indefinitely in disregard of the principle of res judicata."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404
Keywords:
application for review; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; mistake of law; request by a party; res judicata;
Judgment 305
38th Session, 1977
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"[A] judgment by the Tribunal on a dispute between an organisation and a staff member affects only the parties to that dispute: it cannot alter a decision affecting third parties which is already in force. The stability of legal relationships would be impaired if staff members were entitled to rely upon new case law to cast doubt on the validity of earlier and final decisions."
Keywords:
effect; judgment of the tribunal; res judicata;
Judgment 224
31st Session, 1973
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"Insofar as [the complainant's] further request for compensation is based on facts prior to [a given date], the Administrative Tribunal has dealt with his claims in Judgment [No. 223 concerning the first complaint]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 223
Keywords:
request by a party; res judicata;
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;
Judgment 135
22nd Session, 1969
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Following a decision tainted by a mistake of law, the Tribunal in Judgment 122 referred the case back to the organisation for a new decision on complainant's application for a permanent post "after considering, in the light of all the evidence in the dossier, whether complainant did in fact meet the requirements for appointment as an international official." After a further rejection, it was established that the organisation "did in fact consider the qualifications, morality and integrity of the applicant; so that it in no way infringed the Tribunal's judgment, but on the contrary conformed strictly to the considerations and decisions of the judgment [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 122
Keywords:
application for execution; confirmatory decision; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; qualifications; res judicata;
Judgment 100
17th Session, 1967
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"In support of his other [claims], the complainant has simply reverted to arguments already dismissed by the Tribunal". The complaint is dismissed.
Keywords:
judgment of the tribunal; res judicata;
Judgment 94
16th Session, 1966
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"By Judgment No. 90 [...] the Tribunal quashed the decision [...] dismissing [the complainant], thereby finding that his reinstatement was possible and not inadvisable; this judgment, which disposes of the issues raised is final, and the organization cannot reopen these issues." [The organization submitted that it had been unable to make its objections to reinstatement in time and that such reinstatement was moreover impossible; it asked the Tribunal to award compensation in lieu of reinstatement.]
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 90
Keywords:
decision quashed; execution of judgment; finality of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; material damages; reinstatement; res judicata; termination of employment;
Judgment 27
6th Session, 1957
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The facts previous to the engagement of the complainant by the defendant organisation have already been the subject of a decision by the United Nations Administrative Tribunal and may therefore not be considered, in keeping with the principle of res judicata pro veritate habetur."
Keywords:
judgment of the tribunal; res judicata; unat;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
|
