ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword > occupational illness

Judgment No. 4761

Decision

The complaint is dismissed.

Summary

The complainant challenges WHO’s refusal to recognise that the illness from which he claims to suffer is service-induced.

Judgment keywords

Keywords

occupational illness; complaint dismissed

Consideration 2

Extract:

Since this involves a medical matter, the Tribunal recalls that, according to consistent precedent, it may not replace the findings of medical experts with its own assessment. However, it does have full competence to say whether there was due process and to examine whether the medical reports on which administrative decisions are based show any material mistake or inconsistency, overlook some essential fact or plainly misread the evidence (see, in particular, Judgments 4699, consideration 6, 4694, consideration 11, 4464, consideration 7, 3994, consideration 5, and 3361, consideration 8).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3361, 3994, 4464, 4694, 4699

Keywords

medical opinion; judicial review; role of the tribunal

Considerations 4-5

Extract:

The Tribunal considers that, in the absence of any provision to the contrary, there is nothing to prevent a medical board from taking into consideration matters that pre-date those in respect of which it has specifically been convened. [...]
[...] The Tribunal recalls in this regard that, in accordance with its case law, where an illness has several possible causes and only one or some of those causes are connected to professional activity, it can only be recognised as a service-induced illness if those particular causes were the determining factor (see, in particular, Judgment 4709, considerations 9 and 10, and the case law cited therein).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 4709

Keywords

illness; service-incurred

Consideration 10

Extract:

In his rejoinder, the complainant asks for the case to be sent back to the Organization so that the internal complaints procedure for harassment can be initiated.
However, the Tribunal considers that this constitutes a new claim, which a complainant is not permitted to enter in her or his rejoinder (see, in particular, Judgments 4396, consideration 7, 4092, consideration 10, and 3086, consideration 3(d)).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3086, 4092, 4396

Keywords

new claim; rejoinder



 
Last updated: 06.03.2024 ^ top