Judgment No. 4067
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant contests the decision not to extend his contract.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
extension of contract; non-renewal of contract; complaint dismissed
Consideration 4
Extract:
The OPCW’s tenure policy is not unlawful (see Judgments 2407 and 2660). In the former judgment the Tribunal observed in consideration 25: “The complainants all reached the end of their fixed-term appointments and were given special extensions to work out the minimum notice period of non-renewal which the Organisation had imposed upon itself. When those short-term extensions expired they had no right and no expectation of any further employment. Their contracts had been made, and accepted by them as being, subject to the seven-year tenure rule. [...]”
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2407, 2660
Keywords
non-renewal of contract
Consideration 5
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal sets its face against assessing the exercise of a discretionary power such as the power not to renew a fixed-term contract, unless it is demonstrated that the competent body acted on some wrong principle, breached procedural rules, overlooked a material fact or reached a clearly wrong conclusion (see, for example, Judgment 3991, consideration 7, and the case law cited therein).
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3991
Keywords
fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; discretion
Consideration 10
Extract:
The third argument is that the decision concerning the complainant involved discrimination and unequal treatment. This principle is engaged and can be taken into consideration by the Tribunal and, if need be, give rise to redress on condition that it is based on precise and proven facts which establish the discrimination has occurred (as to its operation in the context of the OPCW, see Judgment 2660, consideration 24, and also, more generally, Judgment 4027, consideration 12).
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2660, 4027
Keywords
equal treatment; discrimination; unequal treatment
Consideration 11
Extract:
As is well established, bad faith or misuse of authority must be proved and is never presumed, and the party alleging bad faith or misuse of authority must prove it (see, for example, Judgments 2800, consideration 21, and 3939, consideration 10).
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2800, 3939
Keywords
burden of proof; misuse of authority; bad faith; abuse of power
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant sought oral proceedings. As the written submissions are sufficient for the Tribunal to reach a reasoned decision, the request for oral proceedings is rejected.
Keywords
oral proceedings
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant also sought an order requiring the OPCW to extract certain information from a database concerning the number of inspections. The complainant has not demonstrated this information is necessary to ensure a fair resolution of his complaint and his request is rejected.
Keywords
disclosure of evidence
|