Judgment No. 3524

• Organization: European Patent Organisation (EPO)
• Date: 30.06.2015
• Original: English
• Judges: Rouiller, Ba, Frydman
• Full judgment text - Full judgment text (french)

Decision

The complaint is dismissed.

Summary

The complainant challenges the non-application to her of a rule concerning automatic promotion.

Judgment keywords

Keywords

acquired right; equal treatment; promotion; complaint dismissed

Consideration 3

Extract:

The Tribunal’s case law, as recalled in Judgment 2682, under 6, establishes that “an acquired right is breached only when [...] an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations by altering fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on. In order to determine whether there has been a breach of acquired rights, it is therefore necessary to ascertain whether the altered terms of employment are fundamental and essential within the meaning of Judgment 832”. This case law was confirmed in Judgment 3074 (under 15 and 16).
It is well settled that the particular arrangements for the grant of promotion confer no acquired rights, because on recruitment staff cannot foretell how they will fare in their career. An organisation may always change the rules on promotion for the sake of efficiency and so as to cope with changing circumstances. (See Judgment 1025, under 4.)

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1025, 2682, 3074

Keywords

acquired right; promotion