2015-Ģ��ƵAT-579

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant failed to identify the grounds for his appeal and thus, the appeal was defective. Ģ��ƵAT inferred that the Appellant claimed Ģ��ƵRWA DT failed to exercise its jurisdiction. Ģ��ƵAT held that the legal conclusion of Ģ��ƵDT that the application before it was not receivable was unassailable. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵRWA DT did not err when it did not discuss whether the case was an exceptional case for extending, waiving, or suspending the deadline for the filing of the application. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵRWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Ģ��ƵRWA DT judgment: The Applicant filed an application before Ģ��ƵRWA DT seeking monetary damages in the amount of USD 3 million for having been denied employment for the preceding ten years and for the alleged threats made against him when he travelled to and from Gaza in 2002. Ģ��ƵRWA DT summarily dismissed the application on the ground that it was not filed in a timely manner and therefore was not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

An appellant has the burden of satisfying Ģ��ƵAT that the judgment being appealed is defective; he or she must identify the alleged defects in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment is defective.

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 Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT 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.

Applicants/Appellants

Achkar

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement