Ģ��ƵDT/2009/029

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

A summary judgment was rendered because, as per art. 9 of the RoP, there was no dispute as to the material facts and judgment was restricted to matters of law. As one of the Applicants did not file an application in person (art. 8.1 (b), 3.1 and 2.1 of Ģ��ƵDT Statute) neither designated a counsel to act on his behalf (art. 12 of Ģ��ƵDT RoP), his application was deemed as not receivable. Furthermore, considering that an apology is beyond the remedies which may be ordered by the Tribunal in accordance with art. 10.5 of Ģ��ƵDT Statute, the application was declared as out of the Tribunal��s mandate.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

A person submitted an application on behalf of the Applicants. The JAB and the Tribunal requested the Applicants to confirm that person as their counsel. Just one of them did it. Moreover, the only remedy sought in the application was an apology from the Administration.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Dismissed as not receivable

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

Gonzalez-Ruiz & Buscaglia

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement