Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµ

2013-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-320

Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements

Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT considered an application for revision of both judgment No. 2010-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-098 (underlying judgment) and judgment No. 2011-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-163 (judgment on application for revision). Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the application for revision of the underlying judgment was not receivable, as it was time-barred for not having been made within one year of the underlying judgment. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Statute and its Rules of Procedure did not provide for the revision of a judgment on revision and that to allow such an application would defeat the purpose of the one-year time limit. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the application for revision of the judgment on application for revision was not receivable. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the application.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Previous Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT judgment: In judgment No. 2010-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-098, Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT reversed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment and affirmed the impugned decision to summarily dismiss Mr Masri. In judgment No. 2011-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-163, Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT rejected an application for revision of judgment No. 2010-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-098.

Legal Principle(s)

The underlying rationale for the provisions relating to an application for revision of judgment is the finality of judgments.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.