Discretion (547, 548, 549, 550, 551,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Discretion
Total judgments found: 609
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 | next >
Judgment 1179
73rd Session, 1992
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Transfer is at the discretion of the Director General [...]. The complainant wants the Tribunal to order the organization to consider his application for transfer to a suitable post. That is not the sort of claim the Tribunal is competent to grant, and it is therefore irreceivable."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; discretion; request for transfer;
Judgment 1177
73rd Session, 1992
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"When the Director-General's decision is not based on the results of an examination marked by an independent body, he has a wide degree of discretion in making an appointment and granting promotion. Though he is not bound by any recommendation from an advisory body, his authority does not make referral to such a body pointless. A selection body relieves him of the burden of carrying out an assessment himself. It ensures that all applications for appointment or promotion, whatever their source, shall be examined impartially and on the merits. And its report enables the Tribunal to appraise the background to the impugned decision and determine whether it shows any flaw."
Keywords:
advisory body; appointment; competition; discretion; further submissions; impartiality; interlocutory order; judicial review; promotion; promotion board; recommendation; report;
Judgment 1175
73rd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, judgments 736 [...] and 1161 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion for the President. Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of dismissal of a probationer, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 736, 1161
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; contract; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The purpose of probation is to find out whether a probationer has the mettle to make a satisfactory career in the organisation. The competent authority will determine on the evidence before it, and possibly after extension of the probation as in the present case where doubt still lingers, whether to dismiss the official or to confirm the appointment. It must indeed be allowed the widest measure of discretion in determining whether someone it has recruited is suitable."
Keywords:
career; discretion; extension of contract; probationary period; qualifications; termination of employment;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The organisation is free to set quotas for the output of patent examiners. The complainant has failed to offer any evidence to suggest that the quotas the organisation set for him were in any way unreasonable or that, even when he attained them, the evenness of his output was such as the organisation was entitled to expect of him. In the circumstances it is not proven that the decision not to confirm his appointment shows any [...] fatal flaws".
Keywords:
discretion; evidence; output; qualifications; reckoning; staff member's duties; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
Judgment 1161
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, Judgments 687 [...] and 736 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion for the [executive head] and the Tribunal will not substitute its own judgment for the organisation's in matters that require such exercise of discretion. Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of dismissal of a probationer, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 687, 736
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The purpose of probation is to find out whether a probationer has the mettle to make a satisfactory career in the Organisation. The competent authority will determine on the evidence before it, and possibly after extension of the probation as in the present case where doubt still lingers, whether to dismiss the official or to confirm the appointment. It must indeed be allowed the widest measure of discretion in determining whether someone it has recruited shows the highest level of qualifications required for a post in the particular field in which he is to be working."
Keywords:
discretion; extension of contract; probationary period; qualifications; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal is satisfied that in this case the President of the Office made proper exercise of the wide discretion he enjoys under Article 13(2) [of the Service Regulations] to decline, on the grounds of poor performance, to confirm the complainant's appointment."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 13(2) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
discretion; probationary period; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1159
72nd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
WHO Staff Rule 1050.2.3 "distinguishes between holders of a career-service appointment and temporary staff. Whereas the former 'shall be given priorities', the Director-General enjoys discretion to 'establish priority' among the latter. He was therefore under no obligation to give any particular priority to the holder of a temporary appointment like the complainant."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF RULE 1050.2.3
Keywords:
career; contract; discretion; fixed-term; organisation's duties; priority;
Judgment 1153
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, Judgments 687 [...] and 736 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion [...] and the Tribunal will not substitute its own judgment for the organisation's in matters that require such exercise of discretion. [...] Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of the dismissal, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 687, 736
Keywords:
case law; discretion; judicial review; probationary period; termination of employment;
Judgment 1152
72nd Session, 1992
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"As [the Tribunal] has said many times, grading requires close familiarity with the conditions in which the staff member works. [...] The decision is, in other words, a discretionary one. [...] Consistent precedent has it that the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment or direct that a new one be made unless it is satisfied on the evidence that there is a fatal flaw".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; limits; post; post classification;
Judgment 1151
72nd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"According to consistent precedent, a decision to appoint or promote a staff member, even though it is a matter of discretion, may be set aside, and one flaw that will be fatal is that it was taken without authority."
Keywords:
appointment; case law; competence; decision; decision-maker; discretion; judicial review; promotion;
Judgment 1148
72nd Session, 1992
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
The complainant objects to the Sickness Fund's refusal to refund the costs of a product which her doctor prescribed and which she bought in a pharmacy. The Tribunal holds that the fact "that a product has been bought in a pharmacy [is immaterial] since a pharmacy may sell many health items that are not products within the meaning of the rule. Likewise a doctor's prescription is no criterion since according to the rule it is a condition of refund over and above the objective effects of the product."
Keywords:
discretion; freedom to choose practitioner; health insurance; medical expenses;
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainant is challenging [the organisation's] Sickness Fund's refusal to refund the cost of an item classified as "phytotherapy". The Tribunal holds that "under Article 14 the administration may determine whether an item that a fund member wants to have refunded is a 'pharmaceutical product' within the meaning of the rule. [...] That is a matter of medical opinion and among the relevant criteria are the preventive or therapeutic efficacy of the product, scientific inquiry into the effects it has, and any risks involved in using it. So decisions by public health bodies are highly relevant, particularly for an international fund like [the organisation's] that covers more than one country and allows free choice of practitioner."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 14 OF RULE 10
Keywords:
discretion; domestic law; freedom to choose practitioner; health insurance; insurance benefits; medical expenses;
Consideration 21
Extract:
The complainant objects to the refusal by Eurocontrol's Sickness Fund of her claim to the refund of costs incurred for treatment. The organisation notified this decision to her by an office memorandum and it constituted an individual decision. "The organisation [...] has wide discretion in the matter and may exercise it as it sees fit for the purpose of ensuring the efficiency and financial soundness of its fund. There is more than one legal procedure it may resort to. It may adopt general rules [...] or else it may take individual decisions on particular cases."
Keywords:
administrative instruction; discretion; general decision; health insurance; individual decision; medical expenses;
Consideration 20
Extract:
The complainant objects to the Sickness Fund's refusal to refund the costs of a given item. "Eurocontrol has [...] discretion under Article 24, which empowers the fund to refuse refund of the costs of treatment which the medical officer deems to be 'non-functional, superfluous or unnecessary'. As was said in Judgment 1088, [article] 24 covers all sorts of 'treatments', however the term 'pharmaceutical product' in [article] 14 is to be construed."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLES 14 AND 24 OF RULE 10
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1088
Keywords:
definition; discretion; health insurance; insurance; limits; medical consultant; medical expenses; refund; refusal;
Judgment 1144
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"As was said in Judgment 806 [...], a decision on a staff report, being a discretionary one, may be set aside only on limited grounds such as a procedural or formal flaw, a mistake of fact or of law, the overlooking of some material fact, abuse of authority or the drawing of a mistaken conclusion from the evidence. That judgment goes on to explain that the review will be more limited because at the EPO there is a procedure for conciliation on staff reports and the Service Regulations allow the staff member to appeal to a joint committee made up of people who are closely familiar with the running of the Office."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 806
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; performance report; rebuttal;
Judgment 1143
72nd Session, 1992
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Regulation 9.8 confers on the Director General discretion to extend the age limit in individual cases if he considers that to be in the organization's interests. The determination of what the organization's interests are being peculiarly within the Director General's discretion, the Tribunal has a limited power of review and will interfere with his decision only if it was taken without authority or [...]."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WIPO STAFF REGULATION 9.8
Keywords:
age limit; discretion; exception; extension beyond retirement age; judicial review; organisation's interest; retirement;
Judgment 1138
72nd Session, 1992
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
"By virtue of UNESCO Staff Rule 104.6(b) a fixed-term contract may at the Director-General's discretion be extended or converted into an indefinite appointment, but the staff member has neither any right to an extension nor any legitimate expectancy of one. In keeping with precedent [...] the Tribunal will not interfere with the discretionary decision not to extend an appointment unless it was made without authority or in breach of a rule of procedure, or was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or overlooked some essential fact, or amounted to an abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 104.6
Keywords:
contract; discretion; extension of contract; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; titularization;
Judgment 1137
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Only on the limited grounds often stated in the case law will the Tribunal interfere with discretionary decisions such as one to promote an official. [...] So the Tribunal will, for example, [not] review the records of the candidates a promotion board was considering".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; promotion;
Judgment 1136
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant is objecting to an appraisal report. "According to well-established precedent [...] a reporting officer has wide discretion [...] and [his assessment] will stand unless there is an obvious mistake of fact or failure to show the sort of objectivity that ought to govern reporting."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; performance report; work appraisal;
Judgment 1131
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Tribunal's "power of review is limited. It may not supplant an organisation's view with its own on such matters as a restructuring of posts or redeployment of staff intended to make savings or improve efficiency. Nor may it consider whether abolishing a post was the right thing to do. But it will interfere with any decision that was taken without authority [etc]".
Keywords:
abolition of post; budgetary reasons; competence of tribunal; discretion; judicial review; reorganisation;
Judgment 1128
71st Session, 1991
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
As stated in Judgment 675, "an international organisation is under an obligation to consider whether or not it is in its interests to renew a contract and to make a decision accordingly: though such a decision is discretionary, it may not 'be arbitrary or irrational'; there 'must be a good reason for it and the reason must be given'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 675
Keywords:
contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; limits; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; organisation's interest;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"It is at the discretion of an international organisation to discontinue employment it has lost confidence in the staff member and no longer believes that he will show due respect for its good name, and the Tribunal will not interfere with the decision the organisation takes in the exercise of that discretion unless it finds one of the fatal flaws that warrant setting the decision aside. Such flaws include procedural defects, failure to take account of some essential fact and misuse of authority."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; organisation's reputation; staff member's duties; termination of employment;
Judgment 1127
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 30
Extract:
"A decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is at the Director General's discretion and, according to well-established precedent, a discretionary decision may be set aside only if it was taken without authority [etc.] "There will be especial caution in reviewing a decision not to confirm the appointment of a probationer in the light of the material criteria. "Where the reason for refusal of confirmation is, as in the present case, unsatisfactory performance the Tribunal will not replace with its own the organisation's assessment of the official's fitness."
Keywords:
appointment; discretion; judicial review; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant suggests that the Reports Committee which recommended against confirming her appointment following probation was biased. "The burden is on the complainant to show that the members of the Committee duly appointed by the Director General were not impartial, and she has failed to offer any evidence to suggest that they were not."
Keywords:
advisory body; bias; burden of proof; complainant; composition of the internal appeals body; discretion; evidence; executive head;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not ordinarily question the competence and qualifications of those whom the Director General appoints in the exercise of his discretion to the Reports Committee, provided that the rules are complied with and the members' independence and impartiality are not in doubt."
Keywords:
advisory body; bias; competence; composition of the internal appeals body; discretion; executive head; judicial review; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1126
71st Session, 1991
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Article 61(5) of the Interpol Staff Rules empowers the Secretary General to grant an official a supplementary indemnity on termination of appointment, "taking into account the particular circumstances relating to the personal situation of the official concerned". The Tribunal finds no evidence of such a "particular circumstance" in this case.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 61(5) OF THE INTERPOL STAFF RULES
Keywords:
amount; condition; discretion; enforcement; provision; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 1125
71st Session, 1991
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Where the Rule [viz. Article 25 of the 1956 Staff Rules] is silent the competent authority - here the Administrative Committee - does have discretion to set the amount of the contribution to be paid from the date of retirement. But its decision will not be immune to review by the Tribunal, which will interfere if it finds some mistake of fact or of law [etc.]". The decision to do away with the material benefit is in breach of Article 25 and cannot stand.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 25 OF THE 1956 STAFF RULES
Keywords:
amount; breach; contributions; discontinuance; discretion; judicial review; no provision; organisation; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1124
71st Session, 1991
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
See Judgment 1126, summary.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 61(5) OF THE INTERPOL STAFF RULES
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1126
Keywords:
amount; condition; discretion; enforcement; provision; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 | next >
|
