Judgment No. 2611
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant argues that the impugned decision was “illegal” because the President of the Office did not apply German law and, also, because he was not accorded the right to be heard before “a competent, independent and impartial national tribunal”. In support of the latter argument, he invokes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. The complainant points to nothing in the terms of his appointment to suggest that German law, as distinct from the EPO Service Regulations, was applicable to any aspect of his employment or dismissal. Accordingly, his argument in that regard must be dismissed (see Judgments 1311 and 1369). So far as concerns the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, they apply, according to their terms, to Member States not to international organisations. Thus, the complainant’s argument that he should have been heard by, and that the matters alleged against him should have been proven in a national tribunal must also be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1311, 1369
Keywords
domestic law
|
