Physical Address

304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124

confirm that the CGT case must be processed in the Labor Court


The Fair Room of the Federal Administrative Litigation Chamber resolved to reject the request of the Executive Branch and declare that the case of the General Confederation of Labor (CGT) must continue its processing in labor justice.

This is the inhibitory action raised by the National Treasury Attorney’s Office so that the Litigation Court can take over the processing of the workers’ union’s claim against the labor section of DNU 70/2023. The request had been based, in addition to the nature of the object under discussion, on the then national collective process that Judge Furnari had registered in the “Observatory” case.

After that, The fair judge Lavié Pico dismantled the collective nature of the Observatory case, which became ineffective to issue on the prohibition raised by the Attorney General’s Office. In particular, speaking out on the request to join the cases pending in the labor jurisdiction to the federal administrative litigation jurisdiction no longer had a reason to exist.

Now, with the vote of judges Sergio Fernández and Carlos Grecco, the courtroom confirmed that decision: “Circumstances that, to this date, make it unnecessary to rule on the recursive issues raised – in the record – regarding a possible conflict of positive competition, linked to the formation of the collective process that has been left without effect”.

In that order of ideas, the magistrates considered that it was up to the National Labor Justice to assume the processing of the CGT Case. “From the terms of the lawsuit initiated by the Argentine Confederation of Labor of the Argentine Republic, it emerges – as has been highlighted by the Federal Prosecutor – that there is no administrative rule of predominant application,” argued Fernández and Grecco.

Federal Administrative Litigation Justice rejected two protections against the Mega DNU

The Federal Administrative Contentious Court of Feria, headed by Enrique Lavié Pico, rejected two amparo actions against the Mega DNU of the National Executive Branch. These are the first pronouncements of that jurisdiction regarding the norm and within the framework of the “Observatorio” and “Rizzo” cases.

The magistrate, in his reasoning, indicated that there was no specific harm to the plaintiffs and, on the other hand, that the DNU is complying with the constitutional review procedure in the National Congress.

In such terms, he said that “it cannot fail to be noted that it is not up to the Judiciary to issue annulment proposals implemented in a generic and abstract manner with reference to the decree questioned here since this would imply curtailing the legal competence established by another power of the State. , especially when there is a constitutional means for its control within the scope of the National Congress (conf. art. 99, inc. 3, of the CN and what is established in law 26,122)”.

He added, along the same lines, “note that it appears from the website of the National Congress and it was also indicated by the defendant in the present case that after the issuance of DNU 70/23, by the National Executive Branch, compliance with the constitutional and legal procedure established for the exercise of the control provided for this purpose (cf. art. 99, subsection 3 and law 26,122). In such terms and in light of the regulatory scheme applicable to the aforementioned decree and in the absence of a detriment of the plaintiff in this case, it is also not possible to consider issues that are already subject to primary examination and control by the competent authorities, as in the case of the National Congress.”





Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *