Judgment No. 4496
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant alleges that he suffered moral harassment, in particular when his end-of-service certificate was drawn up.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
certificate of service; harassment; complaint dismissed
Consideration 12
Extract:
[I]n his submissions the complainant essentially asks the Tribunal to repeat the Advisory Board’s analysis and to substitute its own assessment of the facts for that of the Board. This misconstrues the role of the Tribunal, which, in Judgment 4344, consideration 8, pointed out:
“[...] that it is not its role to reweigh the evidence before an investigative body which, as the primary trier of facts, has had the benefit of actually seeing and hearing the persons involved, and of assessing the reliability of what they have said. For that reason, such a body is entitled to considerable deference.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4344
Keywords
harassment; role of the tribunal
Consideration 9
Extract:
In Judgment 4167, consideration 7, the Tribunal stated the following concerning the applicable provision in another organisation that made the existence of harassment contingent on the alleged harasser’s intention to commit harassment:
[...]
This Tribunal is obviously not bound by the case law of the courts of the European Union. However, in the present case, it interprets Article 12a(3) of the Staff Regulations in the same way, bearing in mind that this interpretation is in line with its general case law on the subject, according to which harassment and mobbing do not require any malicious intent (see Judgments 2524, consideration 25, 3400, consideration 7, and 4085, consideration 15).” [...]
The Tribunal reiterated that intent is not a necessary element of harassment in Judgment 3250, consideration 9.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2524, 3400, 4085, 4167
Keywords
intention of parties; harassment; case law of other tribunals
Consideration 10
Extract:
The Tribunal [...] notes that, in accordance with the requirements of its case law, as recalled, for example, in Judgment 3577, consideration 10, the organisation dealt with the complainant’s allegations of harassment in a timely and efficient manner.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3577
Keywords
delay; harassment
|
