2015-惇蹋厙AT-495

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT held that the Appellant did not indicate any errors on the part of 惇蹋厙RWA DT that would require a reversal of its judgment. 惇蹋厙AT held that there was no error in 惇蹋厙RWA DT＊s finding. 惇蹋厙AT held that the Appellant did not comply with the filing deadlines. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙RWA DT did not commit any error when it determined that the application before it was not receivable as it was time-barred. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to provide her with financial assistance after she developed a health condition due to the spraying of insecticide while at work. 惇蹋厙RWA DT dismissed the application as not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

Time limits will be strictly enforced by 惇蹋厙AT.

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 惇蹋厙DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 惇蹋厙AT 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

Diab

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement