2015-惇蹋厙AT-579

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT held that the Appellant failed to identify the grounds for his appeal and thus, the appeal was defective. 惇蹋厙AT inferred that the Appellant claimed 惇蹋厙RWA DT failed to exercise its jurisdiction. 惇蹋厙AT held that the legal conclusion of 惇蹋厙DT that the application before it was not receivable was unassailable. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙RWA 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. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 惇蹋厙RWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

惇蹋厙RWA DT judgment: The Applicant filed an application before 惇蹋厙RWA 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. 惇蹋厙RWA 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 惇蹋厙AT 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 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

Achkar

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement