Concerning receivability ratione temporis, which the Tribunal examined on its own motion, the Tribunal found that non-compliance with the deadline for technical reasons and supported by evidence falls outside the scope of art. 8.3 of its Statute, which requires a written request for an extension from an Applicant. As such, the Tribunal was satisfied that in this case, the Applicants filed their applications after the set deadline due to reasons outside of their control, which they timely flagged, and found the applications receivable ratione temporis. Concerning receivability ratione materiae...
Annex I
-
9.8(c)
1
-
Annex I
6
-
Annex II
1
-
Annex III
2
-
Appendix B
1
-
Appendix C
1
-
Appendix D
46
-
Article 3.9(g)
1
-
Article 4.17(b)
1
-
Chapter IV
1
-
Chapter X
3
-
Chapter XI
6
-
Disposition 9.6(c)(iii)
0
-
Provisional Rule 11.1
1
-
Rule 1
2
-
Rule 1.1
2
-
Rule 1.1(c)
2
-
Rule 1.1(j)
1
-
Rule 1.2
29
-
Rule 1.2(a)
12
-
Rule 1.2(b)
26
-
Rule 1.2(c)
28
-
Rule 1.2(d)
1
-
Rule 1.2(e)
21
-
Rule 1.2(f)
51
-
Rule 1.2(g)
11
-
Rule 1.2(h)
1
-
Rule 1.2(i)
4
-
Rule 1.2(j)
1
-
Rule 1.2(k)
4
-
Rule 1.2(p)
2
-
Rule 1.2(q)
11
-
Rule 1.2(r)
1
-
Rule 1.2(s)
1
-
Rule 1.2(t)
4
-
Rule 1.3
5
-
Rule 1.3(a)
1
-
Rule 1.5
3
-
Rule 1.5(a)
11
-
Rule 1.5(c)
1
-
Rule 1.6
0
-
Rule 1.7
4
-
Rule 1.9
1
-
Rule 10
2
-
Rule 10.1
28
-
Rule 10.1(a)
45
-
Rule 10.1(b)
3
-
Rule 10.1(c)
10
-
Rule 10.2
37
-
Rule 10.2(a)
26
-
Rule 10.2(a)(i)
8
-
Rule 10.2(a)(ii)
6
-
Rule 10.2(a)(ix)
13
-
Rule 10.2(a)(v)
4
-
Rule 10.2(a)(vii)
3
-
Rule 10.2(a)(viii)
36
-
Rule 10.2(b)
10
-
Rule 10.2(b)(i-iii)
1
-
Rule 10.2(b)(i)
3
-
Rule 10.2(b)(iii)
3
-
Rule 10.2(c)
4
-
Rule 10.2(vii)
1
-
Rule 10.3
23
-
Rule 10.3(a)
18
-
Rule 10.3(b)
41
-
Rule 10.3(c)
4
-
Rule 10.4
27
-
Rule 10.4(a)
4
-
Rule 10.5
4
-
Rule 101.1
2
-
Rule 101.2
2
-
Rule 101.2(b)
1
-
Rule 101.2(c)
1
-
Rule 101.2(d)
2
-
Rule 101.2(p)
1
-
Rule 101.3
6
-
Rule 101.3(a)
1
-
Rule 103.12
1
-
Rule 103.15
1
-
Rule 103.20(b)
1
-
Rule 104.11
1
-
Rule 104.12
4
-
Rule 104.12(b)(ii)
1
-
Rule 104.12(b)(iii)
5
-
Rule 104.12(c)
1
-
Rule 104.13
11
-
Rule 104.14
1
-
Rule 104.14(a)(ii)
1
-
Rule 104.15
1
-
Rule 104.15(b)(ii)
1
-
Rule 104.3
3
-
Rule 104.3(a)
1
-
Rule 104.3(b)
1
-
Rule 104.7
1
-
Rule 104.7(c)
1
-
Rule 104.8
1
-
Rule 105.1(c)
1
-
Rule 105.2
3
-
Rule 105.2(a)
2
-
Rule 105.3
1
-
Rule 107.20(i)
1
-
Rule 107.9
1
-
Rule 108.1
1
-
Rule 109.1(c)
5
-
Rule 109.1(c)(i)
1
-
Rule 109.3
2
-
Rule 109.4(d)
1
-
Rule 109.7
1
-
Rule 109.7(a)
1
-
Rule 11
4
-
Rule 11.1
6
-
Rule 11.1(a)
2
-
Rule 11.1(c)
3
-
Rule 11.2
171
-
Rule 11.2 (c)
36
-
Rule 11.2 (d)
6
-
Rule 11.2(a)
157
-
Rule 11.2(b)
63
-
Rule 11.2(c)
166
-
Rule 11.2(d)
14
-
Rule 11.3
4
-
Rule 11.3(b)(i)
2
-
Rule 11.3(c)
1
-
Rule 11.3(ii)
1
-
Rule 11.4
40
-
Rule 11.4(a)
26
-
Rule 11.4(b)
7
-
Rule 11.4(c)
3
-
Rule 11.4(d)
4
-
Rule 11.4(g)
2
-
Rule 11.5(d)
1
-
Rule 110.1
7
-
Rule 110.2
3
-
Rule 110.2(a)
1
-
Rule 110.3
6
-
Rule 110.4
7
-
Rule 110.4(b)
1
-
Rule 110.4(b)(i)
1
-
Rule 110.7(b)
1
-
Rule 110.7(d)
1
-
Rule 111.1
2
-
Rule 111.2.2
1
-
Rule 111.2(a)
9
-
Rule 111.2(a)(i)
2
-
Rule 111.2(f)
2
-
Rule 112.2(b)
2
-
Rule 112.3
1
-
Rule 12.3
6
-
Rule 12.3(b)
22
-
Rule 13.1
20
-
Rule 13.1(a)
4
-
Rule 13.1(c)
1
-
Rule 13.1(d)
17
-
Rule 13.1(e)
3
-
Rule 13.1(f)
1
-
Rule 13.11
1
-
Rule 13.2
1
-
Rule 13.4
5
-
Rule 14
1
-
Rule 14(b)(ii)
1
-
Rule 17
2
-
Rule 2.1
8
-
Rule 204.2
1
-
Rule 3.1
5
-
Rule 3.1(b)
1
-
Rule 3.10
10
-
Rule 3.10(a)
4
-
Rule 3.10(b)
6
-
Rule 3.11(a)
10
-
Rule 3.13
4
-
Rule 3.14
2
-
Rule 3.14(a)
1
-
Rule 3.15
3
-
Rule 3.15(ii)
1
-
Rule 3.16
3
-
Rule 3.17
4
-
Rule 3.17(c)
1
-
Rule 3.17(ii)
5
-
Rule 3.18
5
-
Rule 3.18(a)
1
-
Rule 3.18(b)
1
-
Rule 3.18(c)
4
-
Rule 3.18(c)(ii)
3
-
Rule 3.18(c)(iii)
2
-
Rule 3.18(e)
1
-
Rule 3.19
1
-
Rule 3.19(a)
2
-
Rule 3.19(g)
2
-
Rule 3.2(g)
0
-
Rule 3.3(a)
2
-
Rule 3.4
1
-
Rule 3.4(a)
2
-
Rule 3.4(e)
1
-
Rule 3.5
1
-
Rule 3.6
3
-
Rule 3.6(a)
2
-
Rule 3.6(a)(iv)
1
-
Rule 3.6(b)
1
-
Rule 3.6(d)
1
-
Rule 3.7
2
-
Rule 3.7(c)
1
-
Rule 3.9
10
-
Rule 3.9(b)
1
-
Rule 301
1
-
Rule 301.3(i)
1
-
Rule 304.4
2
-
Rule 309.3
1
-
Rule 309.4
1
-
Rule 4
1
-
Rule 4.1
8
-
Rule 4.12
15
-
Rule 4.12(a)
3
-
Rule 4.12(b)
1
-
Rule 4.12(c)
7
-
Rule 4.12(c)
0
-
Rule 4.13
20
-
Rule 4.13(a)
3
-
Rule 4.13(b)
3
-
Rule 4.13(c)
61
-
Rule 4.14
4
-
Rule 4.14 (b)
1
-
Rule 4.14(b)
7
-
Rule 4.15
5
-
Rule 4.16
5
-
Rule 4.16
0
-
Rule 4.16
0
-
Rule 4.16(b)(i)
1
-
Rule 4.16(b)(ii)
2
-
Rule 4.17
15
-
Rule 4.17(c)
1
-
Rule 4.18
10
-
Rule 4.18(a)
1
-
Rule 4.18(c)
1
-
Rule 4.19
1
-
Rule 4.2
4
-
Rule 4.3
5
-
Rule 4.4
3
-
Rule 4.4(a)
3
-
Rule 4.4(b)
3
-
Rule 4.5
6
-
Rule 4.5(a)
1
-
Rule 4.5(b)
1
-
Rule 4.5(c)
7
-
Rule 4.5(d)
1
-
Rule 4.6
1
-
Rule 4.7
6
-
Rule 4.7(a)
3
-
Rule 4.8
16
-
Rule 4.8(b)
1
-
Rule 4.9(a)
2
-
Rule 5.1(e)(ii)
5
-
Rule 5.2
7
-
Rule 5.2(c)
1
-
Rule 5.3
9
-
Rule 5.3(c)
1
-
Rule 5.3(e)
1
-
Rule 5.3(f)
7
-
Rule 5.3(ii)
1
-
Rule 6.1
2
-
Rule 6.2
21
-
Rule 6.2(a)
3
-
Rule 6.2(b)
1
-
Rule 6.2(b)(ii)
2
-
Rule 6.2(f)
4
-
Rule 6.2(g)
2
-
Rule 6.2(j)
2
-
Rule 6.2(k)
2
-
Rule 6.2(k)(iii)
2
-
Rule 6.29b)(i)
0
-
Rule 6.3(a)
3
-
Rule 6.4
1
-
Rule 6.5
5
-
Rule 6.6
5
-
Rule 7
1
-
Rule 7.1
7
-
Rule 7.1(a)
2
-
Rule 7.1(a)(iv)
1
-
Rule 7.1(b)
1
-
Rule 7.10
4
-
Rule 7.14
2
-
Rule 7.14(d)
1
-
Rule 7.15
5
-
Rule 7.15(h)
1
-
Rule 7.16
1
-
Rule 7.2
1
-
Rule 7.4
2
-
Rule 7.6
1
-
Rule 8.1
8
-
Rule 8.1(a)
1
-
Rule 8.1(f)
11
-
Rule 8.2
1
-
Rule 9
2
-
Rule 9.1
6
-
Rule 9.1(a)
1
-
Rule 9.11
9
-
Rule 9.11 (a) (vii)
0
-
Rule 9.12
4
-
Rule 9.2
2
-
Rule 9.2(a)
1
-
Rule 9.2(b)
1
-
Rule 9.2(c)
1
-
Rule 9.3
6
-
Rule 9.3(a)(i)
2
-
Rule 9.3(c)(i)
2
-
Rule 9.4
39
-
Rule 9.5
1
-
Rule 9.6
40
-
Rule 9.6
1
-
Rule 9.6 (c)(i)
1
-
Rule 9.6.(b)
1
-
Rule 9.6(a)
17
-
Rule 9.6(b)
14
-
Rule 9.6(c)
12
-
Rule 9.6(c)(i)
8
-
Rule 9.6(c)(ii)
7
-
Rule 9.6(c)(iii)
1
-
Rule 9.6(c)(v)
1
-
Rule 9.6(e)
53
-
Rule 9.6(f)
14
-
Rule 9.6(g)
3
-
Rule 9.6(h)
1
-
Rule 9.6(i)
1
-
Rule 9.7
12
-
Rule 9.7(a)
1
-
Rule 9.7(b)
1
-
Rule 9.7(d)
3
-
Rule 9.8
9
-
Rule 9.8(a)
4
-
Rule 9.9
7
Showing 1 - 6 of 6
Concerning receivability ratione temporis, which the Tribunal examined on its own motion, the Tribunal found that non-compliance with the deadline for technical reasons and supported by evidence falls outside the scope of art. 8.3 of its Statute, which requires a written request for an extension from an Applicant. As such, the Tribunal was satisfied that in this case, the Applicants filed their applications after the set deadline due to reasons outside of their control, which they timely flagged, and found the applications receivable ratione temporis. Concerning receivability ratione materiae...
Concerning receivability ratione temporis, which the Tribunal examined on its own motion, the Tribunal found that non-compliance with the deadline for technical reasons and supported by evidence falls outside the scope of art. 8.3 of its Statute, which requires a written request for an extension from an Applicant. As such, the Tribunal was satisfied that in this case, the Applicants filed their applications after the set deadline due to reasons outside of their control, which they timely flagged, and found the applications receivable ratione temporis. Concerning receivability ratione materiae...
Concerning receivability ratione temporis, which the Tribunal examined on its own motion, the Tribunal found that non-compliance with the deadline for technical reasons and supported by evidence falls outside the scope of art. 8.3 of its Statute, which requires a written request for an extension from an Applicant. As such, the Tribunal was satisfied that in this case, the Applicants filed their applications after the set deadline due to reasons outside of their control, which they timely flagged, and found the applications receivable ratione temporis. Concerning receivability ratione materiae...
Concerning receivability ratione temporis, which the Tribunal examined on its own motion, the Tribunal found that non-compliance with the deadline for technical reasons and supported by evidence falls outside the scope of art. 8.3 of its Statute, which requires a written request for an extension from an Applicant. As such, the Tribunal was satisfied that in this case, the Applicants filed their applications after the set deadline due to reasons outside of their control, which they timely flagged, and found the applications receivable ratione temporis. Concerning receivability ratione materiae...
Concerning receivability ratione temporis, which the Tribunal examined on its own motion, the Tribunal found that non-compliance with the deadline for technical reasons and supported by evidence falls outside the scope of art. 8.3 of its Statute, which requires a written request for an extension from an Applicant. As such, the Tribunal was satisfied that in this case, the Applicants filed their applications after the set deadline due to reasons outside of their control, which they timely flagged, and found the applications receivable ratione temporis. Concerning receivability ratione materiae...