Judgment No. 4699
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant contests the decisions that found that his injuries had consolidated without permanent invalidity.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
occupational illness; complaint dismissed
Considerations 5 & 8
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal fails to see how the fact that the doctor was appointed by the insurance company on the basis of a list previously approved by Eurocontrol should create a conflict of interest, since, if the Organisation were to appoint the doctor itself, the same issue would still arise given that it would then be its own financial interests that would be directly at stake.
[...]
The assertion that the Sickness Fund Supervisor was subject to a conflict of interests simply through being the “manager” of the fund is based on a mere premise, devoid of any prima facie evidence, and there is nothing in the documents submitted by the parties to suggest that such was the case here. Furthermore, if such an assertion were to be followed, it would lead to the conclusion that it was not permissible for any international organisation to create a sickness and invalidity insurance fund for the benefit of its officials, or, at the very least, that an organisation had to appoint a third party body to manage any fund it created, which is untenable.
Keywords
conflict of interest; health insurance
Consideration 6
Extract:
[I]t is not for the Tribunal, in medical matters, to replace the findings of medical experts with its own assessment (see, in particular, Judgments 4473, consideration 13, 4464, consideration 7, and 3361, consideration 8).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3361, 4464, 4473
Keywords
medical opinion; role of the tribunal
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he fact that the Secretary of the Joint Committee for Disputes was a “direct subordinate” of the Head of the Human Resources and Services Unit does not in itself compromise the independence and impartiality of that body (see, in this connection, Judgment 4594, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4594
Keywords
composition of the internal appeals body
Consideration 11
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal considers that the reasoning on which the [impugned] decision [...] was based constitutes a sufficient response to the various arguments raised by the complainant in his internal complaint [...]. In her decision, the Head of the Human Resources and Services Unit referred to the opinion of the Joint Committee for Disputes, explaining that she endorsed the view of the two committee members who considered the internal complaint to be unfounded, and this in itself met the requirements of the case law (see Judgments 4473, considerations 4 and 5, and 4281, consideration 11). In addition, she set out the reasons why she considered that due process had been followed and why any challenge to the medical aspects of matter was now time-barred. This reasoning was sufficient and adequate in view of the complainant’s arguments.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4281, 4473
Keywords
report of the internal appeals body; motivation of final decision
| 
