2022-惇蹋厙AT-1193

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

Ms. Larriera sought revision of the 惇蹋厙AT judgment on the grounds that new decisive facts had emerged from the French government regarding her relationship with the deceased participant of the 惇蹋厙JSPF, Mr. M. Specifically, she maintains that the French government has endorsed the findings of a Brazilian court that she was in a ※stable union§ with Mr. M., and that this has also been annotated on the death certificate of Mr. M.

惇蹋厙AT observed that Ms. Larriera＊s application for revision was untimely. In addition, 惇蹋厙AT concluded that these allegedly decisive facts occurred in 2021, well after the 惇蹋厙AT issued its 2020 Judgment. Thus, these cannot be considered ※new facts§ within the meaning of Article 11(1) of the Statute. In addition, 惇蹋厙AT held that these ※new facts§ did not suggest that the French authorities considered that Mr. M. was divorced from his wife (Ms. M.) or that Ms. Larriera had acquired the status of his spouse at the time of Mr. M.＊s death.

惇蹋厙AT also held that Ms. Larriera＊s arguments about alleged errors of the 惇蹋厙AT in interpretation of the law did not bring her application within the parameters of Article 11(1) of the Statute. Her application constitutes a disguised attempt to re-open the case. Her application was thus not receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Ms. Larriera sought revision of Judgment No. 2020-惇蹋厙AT-1004, in which the 惇蹋厙AT dismissed her appeal of the decision of the Standing Committee that she was not entitled to a widow's benefit from the 惇蹋厙JSPF.

Legal Principle(s)

Facts which occurred after a judgment has been given are not such facts within the meaning of Article 11 of the 惇蹋厙AT Statute and Article 24 of the 惇蹋厙AT＊s Rules of Procedure. This remains the case irrespective of the legal consequences that such facts may have.

An application for revision cannot be a collateral means of attack on the judgment, nor can it be allowed to be a second right of final appeal.

Outcome

Revision, correction, interpretation or execution

Outcome Extra Text

The application for revision of Judgment No. 2020-惇蹋厙AT-1004 was dismissed.

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

Carolina Larriera

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement