Interpretation (237,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Interpretation
Total judgments found: 195
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
Judgment 2258
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Communications from an organisation to a staff member must be interpreted according to the meaning that their addressee can reasonably ascribe to them. Since it owes a duty of care to its employees, an administration which intends to take a compulsory decision binding the person concerned must express its decision clearly so as to remove from its action any potentially harmful ambiguity."
Keywords:
binding character; decision; duty of care; effect; injury; interpretation; organisation's duties;
Consideration 5(b)
Extract:
Statutory provisions must be interpreted in such a way that their true meaning is preserved, taking into account, inter alia, the actual letter of the provision, its origin, its aim and its place within the legal framework of an organisation, and without necessarily dwelling on inaccurate or inappropriate terms.
Keywords:
interpretation; interpretation of rules;
Judgment 2232
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the decision impugned before the Tribunal is not an administrative decision, but essentially a political one. The Tribunal holds that "the complainant was an international civil servant who was entitled to appeal to the Tribunal against a decision to terminate his appointment. That decision must be viewed as an administrative decision, even though it was taken by the Conference of the States parties."
Keywords:
decision; executive body; executive head; grounds; iloat; interpretation; member state; official; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; termination of employment;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the complainant was not a staff member. "The defendant [...] considers that since the particular case of the Director-General of the Organisation was not expressly provided for in the texts on which the Tribunal's jurisdiction is based, an express provision recognising its jurisdiction would have been necessary. It points out that [another international organisation] (UNESCO), having realised that it had no statutory provision nor any contractual stipulation attributing jurisdiction in the event of a dispute involving its Director-General, decided in 1999 to include such a clause in the contract it signed with him. whilst the Tribunal does not deny that UNESCO thereby clarified difficulties which were liable to arise, it does not view that as authority for the reverse proposition that contracts containing no such clause, entered into by other organisations with their respective chief administrative officers, must be deemed to exclude the jurisdiction of the Tribunal."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; contract; decision; exception; executive head; grounds; interpretation; no provision; organisation; provision; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; termination of employment; written rule;
Judgment 2227
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was informed by a letter of 22 December 1999 that the administration reserved the right to approve the photocopying and distribution of circulars issued by staff representatives. "The Tribunal recalled, in Judgment 911 [...], that a staff association enjoys broad freedom of speech and the right to take to task the administration of the organisation whose employees it represents, but that like any other freedom such freedom has its bounds. thus any action that impairs the dignity of the international civil service, and likewise gross abuse of freedom of speech, are inadmissible. But the prevention of such abuse cannot give the administration a power of prior censorship over the communication of written information produced by the groups and associations concerned. Herein lies the problem in this case: the Office considers it has a general right to authorise, which it maintains it uses only with moderation, but the limits of such authorisation are by no means clear. The Tribunal cannot set aside a general decision on the grounds that it does not offer the guarantees that are in any case available to staff members on the basis of the general principles of international civil service law, as established and interpreted by the Tribunal and other international administrative tribunals. These principles confine the administration's scope of action to cases where there is gross abuse of the right to freedom of expression or lack of protection of the individual interests of persons affected by remarks that are ill-intentioned, defamatory or which concern their private lives. And it is in the light of these principles that the letter of 22 December 1999 [...] should be interpreted. a refusal to grant an authorisation may be regarded as lawful only if it complies with the above principles."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 911
Keywords:
acceptance; case law; collective rights; exception; freedom of speech; general decision; general principle; iloat; international civil service principles; interpretation; judicial review; limits; official; organisation; outside activity; publication; refusal; respect for dignity; right; safeguard; staff member's interest; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity; tribunal;
Judgment 2218
95th Session, 2003
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Organization argues that the complainant submitted new "conclusions" to the Tribunal, compared to those he had put forward in his internal appeal [...]. In fact, the complainant's pleas, whether in the internal appeal or before the Tribunal, consist in challenging the decision taken regarding his grade and in obtaining a position in the normal salary scale at the level closest to the salary he had been receiving in the previous system. His request to be placed at a graded level within the new scale instead of one altogether outside the scale cannot properly be considered as going beyond the claims he had submitted in the internal appeals proceedings".
Keywords:
claim; complainant; complaint; decision; identical claims; iloat; internal appeal; interpretation; new claim; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; salary; scale;
Judgment 2213
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6(a)
Extract:
The Tribunal had dismissed the complaint by which the complainant impugned the non-renewal of his appointment. In his application for review of that judgment, he submits that a post intended for him had been mentioned in the draft programme and budget and that, since the document had been approved as it stood by the General Conference, this implied his appointment to the post at issue. "The question arises as to whether such an argument affords grounds for review. It is not necessary to answer that question, considering that the fact does not appear to be decisive, since the adoption of a budget could [...] not be interpreted as a decision to make an appointment."
Keywords:
acceptance; admissible grounds for review; application for review; appointment; assignment; consequence; contract; decision; executive body; inadmissible grounds for review; interpretation; non-renewal of contract; post;
Judgment 2193
94th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant, who had entered into a civil solidarity contract (pacte civil de solidarité, hereinafter 'pacs') with his male partner, informed the administration that his partner was entirely dependant on him. The organisation replied that, under the rules currently applicable within the United Nations system, the pacs was not recognised as a formal marriage that could create an entitlement to any benefits or allowances for a dependent spouse. The Tribunal states that "neither the letter nor the spirit of the relevant texts cited by the parties, nor indeed the case law, enable partners bound by a pacs to be considered as having the status of spouses within the meaning of Staff Rule 103.9."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 103.9
Keywords:
applicable law; case law; contract; dependant; domestic law; family allowance; interpretation; marital status; organisation's duties; same-sex marriage;
Judgment 2086
92nd Session, 2002
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
In order to be awarded a personal promotion the complainant must have completed 18 years of continuous service under a fixed-term or permanent contract. "The [organisation] is arguing that [...] in determining whether the complainant fulfilled [such a] requirement [...] reference must be made to clauses of the contracts which came into force unopposed, [including] short-term contracts [...] The approach is too rigid [...] The issue was [not] one of applying or interpreting the complainant's early appointments [...] It is a matter of applying a rule which is currently in force and which concerns the legal nature of former contractual relationships between the parties. In other words, in the light of the current rule, what type of appointment did the early contracts establish? It should be noted that the name they were given will not necessarily express the actual relationship".
Keywords:
applicable law; condition; contract; criteria; definition; effective date; enforcement; fixed-term; interpretation; permanent appointment; personal promotion; provision; reckoning; short-term; working hours;
Judgment 2017
90th Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"An organisation must interpret the statements of a staff member in good faith and [...] as part of its duty to spare the staff member unnecessary injury, it may also be called upon to provide procedural guidance and help to put right a mistake (see Judgment 1734, [...] under 3(g))."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1734
Keywords:
good faith; injury; interpretation; organisation's duties; request by a party; staff member's interest; statement of intent;
Judgment 2006
90th Session, 2001
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant contends that based on a recently published circular, his promotion should have been made retroactive to the date he took up his new duties. "However, to give retroactive effect to [the] circular would not be possible since according to customary methods of interpretation any action prescribed in a text is deemed to be of immediate effect. There is no presumption of retroactive effect.' (Judgment 742 [...]). Indeed, there can be no retroactive application of the rights sought by the complainant, and his status results only from the publication of the circular in question. The charge of arbitrariness would be tenable if there were no basis for applying the circular to the case of the complainant, but, as shown above, the scope of the text explicitly covered his situation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 742
Keywords:
bias; date; effective date; general principle; interpretation; non-retroactivity; promotion; publication; right; staff regulations and rules; written rule;
Judgment 1996
89th Session, 2000
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
"In Judgment 1821 the Tribunal recalled that where a methodology refers to an external standard but grants discretion to the governing body to depart from that standard, the organisation has a duty to state proper reasons for such departure (see Judgment 1682 [...]). [...] However, departure from the index given as an orientation in the Staff Regulations requires more than just a statement of proper reasons. In order to protect staff against arbitrariness, the criteria relied on to deviate from the orientation suggested by the external index must be objective, adequate and known to the staff (see Judgment 1912, under 15)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1682, 1821, 1912
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; breach; burden of proof; criteria; duty to substantiate decision; interpretation; rule of another organisation; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1820
86th Session, 1999
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Where a rule is cast in more than one official language and no one version is to prevail, all versions shall be deemed to bear the same meaning and the right construction shall be the one that respects the draftsman's intent and best reconciles them". The Tribunal cites the case law.
Keywords:
authentic version; case law; interpretation; purpose; subsidiary; written rule;
Judgment 1814
86th Session, 1999
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
The Joint Committee for disputes dealt with the "complaint" by correspondence. The Tribunal considers that the texts provide "that the Committee shall meet', and it meets only if all the full members, or in their absence the alternate members, are present'. On that score alone there was breach of due process and the impugned decision cannot stand."
Keywords:
condition; due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; interpretation; procedural flaw; report;
Judgment 1790
86th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant says that the Organisation has paid him a termination indemnity reckoned on the strength of only six years' service though he was on its staff for over twelve years. The defendant's answer is that according to the Staff Regulations the complainant had only six years' unbroken service. The Tribunal considers that "the defendant has misread its own rules. For the purpose of reckoning the total period of unbroken service they do not, as it makes out, distinguish between a year served as a fellow' and a year served as a staff member or auxiliary."
Keywords:
continuance of operations; interpretation; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 1755
85th Session, 1998
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"[A]ny ambiguity in the Regulations the [Organisation] has issued should be construed contra proferentem and in favour of the staff."
Keywords:
interpretation; organisation's interest; pension; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; written rule;
Judgment 1720
84th Session, 1998
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"A strong line of precedent has it that time limits, though necessary in law, are not supposed to set traps: they are to be applied with the good faith that must govern relations between an international organisation and its staff."
Keywords:
good faith; internal appeal; interpretation; procedure before the tribunal; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 1718
84th Session, 1998
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute, which is about the implied rejection of a claim, serves to allow a complainant who has got no decision on his claim to act as if a final decision had been taken. "If no decision is forthcoming within sixty days of the notification of the claim to the administration, the complainant may, within a further time limit of ninety days, bring a complaint against the implied rejection, which becomes the impugned decision. [...] There is no provision for applying to the Tribunal for an order to the Director general to state a negative final decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(3) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complaint; date of notification; iloat statute; implied decision; interpretation; time limit;
Judgment 1717
84th Session, 1998
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Interpretation depends both on the context and on the nature of the text. [...] Judgment 1614 used the word [pay] to determine the amount of damages and ordered the fund to pay [the complainant] what she would have earned for six months' service. So 'pay' means the amount she would have actually received had she been under contract for those six months, and it must include salary and any allowances payable to her of whatever kind - post adjustment, family allowance, and so forth. It does not, however, include the compulsory health insurance and other contributions that were routinely docked from her emoluments."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1614
Keywords:
allowance; application for execution; application for interpretation; definition; interpretation; salary; tribunal;
Judgment 1618
82nd Session, 1997
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The purpose of the rule in Article 38 of the Service Regulations is such that "the need for further consultation would be understandable if the proposals had been so radically amended as to be really new ones."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 38 OF EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
advisory body; consultation; interpretation; purpose; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1553
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
UNESCO Staff Regulation 4.4 grants priority to serving staff for appointment to vacant posts. "Despite the unanimous recommendations by the senior personnel advisory boards and by the Appeals Board the Organization failed to give the complainant priority for vacant posts. It put the wrong question to its units and to its bureau of personnel. The right question was not whether there was a post that fitted her qualifications and experience but whether there was a post of which she was capable of fulfilling the duties competently. [...] No instructions went out that she should be given priority for any vacant posts. So the decision to terminate her services rested on a misinterpretation of Regulation 4.4 and so on a mistake of law. That decision must therefore be set aside".
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF REGULATION 4.4
Keywords:
abolition of post; candidate; decision; internal candidate; interpretation; material damages; moral injury; organisation's duties; priority; qualifications; reassignment; reinstatement; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; vacancy;
Judgment 1502
81st Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Organization's "own interests and sound management demand strict compliance with time limits, and non-compliance means forfeiting a right or the exercise thereof: see Judgment 1446 [...] under 3, the further judgments cited therein and Judgment 1485 [...]. A time limit is not to be waived just because claims are seldom late or because the consequences of refusing waiver would be too harsh."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1466, 1485
Keywords:
case law; delay; exception; interpretation; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Time limits must be construed in good faith. If an organisation wants to put procedural restrictions on one of the staff member's rights or on the exercise thereof it must draft clearly enough to avoid setting traps."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1376
Keywords:
case law; delay; good faith; interpretation; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The time limit must start at the date at which payment becomes due. If that were not so, the lapse of time would work to the claimant's detriment for as long as the rules precluded his making the claim. To make the would-be claimant wait, for any reason, before making the claim bars repayment. So the staff have grounds for supposing that they are not free [under Staff Regulation R VIII 1.01] to make claims until they can group." That being a reasonable construction, "for CERN to impose a narrower one would be an abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF REGULATION R VIII 1.01
Keywords:
good faith; interpretation; no provision; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit; written rule;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
|
