Formal flaw (558, 862,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Formal flaw
Total judgments found: 44
< previous | 1, 2, 3 | next >
Judgment 2163
93rd Session, 2002
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"An appointment by an international organisation is a discretionary decision. Being subject to only limited review, it may be set aside only if it was taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some material fact was overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if a clearly wrong conclusion was drawn from the evidence. The Tribunal will, in cases like the present, exercise its power of review with special caution, its function being not to judge the candidates on merit but to allow the organisation full responsibility for its choice. [...] Nevertheless, anyone who applies for a post to be filled by some process of selection is entitled to have his application considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition. That is a right that every applicant must enjoy, whatever his hopes of success may be (see Judgments 1077 [...], 1497 [...] and 1549 [...])."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1077, 1497, 1549
Keywords:
abuse of power; appointment; candidate; case law; competition; decision; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; equal treatment; flaw; formal flaw; good faith; international civil service principles; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; right;
Judgment 2114
92nd Session, 2002
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"When the measure takes the form of a reprimand, the Tribunal will exercise a limited power of review. It will not interfere 'unless the measure was taken without authority, or violates a rule of form or procedure, or is based on an error of fact or of law, or if essential facts have not been taken into consideration, or if it is tainted with abuse of authority, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion has been drawn from the facts'. (see Judgment 274, [...], under 2.)"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 274
Keywords:
abuse of power; censure; conduct; decision-maker; disciplinary measure; disregard of essential fact; duty of discretion; formal flaw; freedom of speech; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw;
Judgment 2040
90th Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has held in many judgments, a decision by an international organisation to make an appointment is a discretionary one and as such is subject to only limited review. It may be quashed only if it was taken without authority, or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it rested on an error of fact or of law, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the evidence. Moreover, the Tribunal will exercise its power of review with special caution in such cases and will not replace the organisation's assessment of the candidates with its own (see Judgment 1497 [...])."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1497
Keywords:
abuse of power; appointment; candidate; competition; decision; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1980
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5 and 10
Extract:
"The complainants contend that Judgment 1663 was not properly executed. According to a general principle, a judgment ordinarily affects only the parties to the suit and applies only to the issues raised in it. The Tribunal has applied that principle in judgments concerning monetary claims by staff members of organisations (see Judgment 1935, [...] under 4 to 6). The complainants were not parties to the proceedings that led to Judgment 1663 and so are not entitled to benefit from it unless they can invoke some special ground."
The complainants were unable to do so. Therefore the Tribunal found that, "having no locus standi to apply for the execution of Judgment 1663, the complainants cannot plead that the execution of the judgment was formally flawed."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1663, 1935
Keywords:
execution of judgment; flaw; formal flaw; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties;
Judgment 1969
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The Tribunal will quash [...] a decision [of a discretionary nature] only if it was taken without authority, or if it was tainted with a procedural or formal flaw or based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if essential facts were overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the evidence."
Keywords:
abuse of power; decision; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; formal flaw; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1763
85th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[W]ith respect to the complainant's submission that the Disciplinary Board's report is not valid because it is not dated, signed or otherwise authenticated, the 'report' is actually a summary record of the Board's meetings. There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the record is not an accurate summary of the Board's views, and it was clearly adopted by the Board, as well as the [Organisation], as representing them. The substance of the summary record clearly indicates the conclusion of the Board. There is thus no irregularity in the form of the report."
Keywords:
claim; disciplinary procedure; formal flaw; formal requirements; report;
Judgment 1576
82nd Session, 1997
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Since the award of end-of-service promotion falls within the Director-General's discretion, the Tribunal exercises only a limited power of review: it will intervene only if there has been breach of some rule of form or procedure or a mistake of law or fact or failure to take some essential fact into account."
Keywords:
discretion; disregard of essential fact; executive head; formal flaw; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; procedural flaw; promotion; separation from service;
Judgment 1484
80th Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Although the complainant was informed of the objections to his work and behaviour, he was never given any warning that was recognisable as such of the organization's intention of ending his appointment before expiry. [...] The decision he impugns shows a serious formal flaw and cannot stand."
Keywords:
formal flaw; notice; organisation's duties; separation from service; termination of employment;
Judgment 1380
78th Session, 1995
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant "did not suffer any injury which hampered her career and is therefore not entitled to any award of damages. The mere fact that a decision was initially flawed does not suffice to warrant awarding her damages for moral injury. The flaw was [later] corrected [...] to be entitled to moral damages she must show that she has suffered more severe injury than that which an improper decision ordinarily causes."
Keywords:
burden of proof; criteria; damages; decision; evidence; flaw; formal flaw; lack of evidence; lack of injury; moral injury; professional injury;
Judgment 1324
76th Session, 1994
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
See Judgment 525, consideration 4.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 525
Keywords:
abuse of power; amendment to the rules; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; exception; executive head; formal flaw; home; home leave; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1317
76th Session, 1994
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
Several recent rulings [...] sharply define the ambit of such review in line with the case law affirmed from the outset: see Judgments 956 [...] under 2 and 3; 1262 [...] under 4; and 1273 [...] under 8.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 956, 1262, 1273
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; contract; decision; discretion; due process; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's interest; procedural flaw; right to reply;
Judgment 1281
75th Session, 1993
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to the case law the grading of posts is a matter within the discretion of the executive head of an international organisation. So the Tribunal will not interfere with the decision impugned in this case unless it was taken without authority or shows some procedural or formal flaw or a mistake of fact or of law, or overlooks some material fact, or is an abuse of authority, or draws a clearly mistaken conclusion from the facts. Moreover, the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment of the facts for the Secretary-General's."
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; competence; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; executive head; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; post classification; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1262
75th Session, 1993
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The case law has made it consistently plain that a decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment, being discretionary, may be set aside only if it was taken without authority, or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the facts, or if there was abuse of authority. Moreover, when the reason given for non-renewal is unsatisfactory performance, the Tribunal will not replace the organisation's assessment of the complainant's fitness for his duties with its own."
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; contract; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; fixed-term; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; procedural flaw; qualifications; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1246
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has held on several occasions, for example in Judgment 1183, a decision by the Director-General not to confirm the appointment of a probationer 'is a discretionary one. Its power of review being limited, the Tribunal will set the decision aside only if it finds a mistake of fact or of law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or a clearly mistaken conclusion on the evidence, or neglect of an essential fact or abuse of authority.'"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1183
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; extension of contract; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; refusal;
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;
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;
Judgment 1022
69th Session, 1990
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 9-10, Summary
Extract:
The Staff Rules provide for a two-month period of consideration to allow the official to decide whether or not to accept the transfer offer. But the decision notified to the complainant failed to allow the two-month limit and was therefore tainted by a formal flaw. As the flaw does not go to the essence of the decision, the Tribunal held that the organization was liable on technical grounds.
Keywords:
flaw; formal flaw; time limit; transfer;
Judgment 1010
68th Session, 1990
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant's internal appeal against termination after the extension of his probation is time-barred. He argues "that an unregistered letter from someone other than the Director-General cannot constitute proper notice of dismissal or of extension of probation. [The] plea fails [...]. Provided that the staff member is given official notice of a decision the time limit starts to run and there is no need for special procedural formalities. And the absence of the Director-General's signature can have no effect on the time limit for appeal even though it may in some circumstances warrant setting the decision aside."
Keywords:
consequence; decision; flaw; formal flaw; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 890
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant's appointment was confirmed only after an extension of his probation. Because he was not notified in time of the decision to extend the probationary period, the complainant seeks to have it set aside. "Where it finds a formal flaw, the Tribunal will determine whether it taints the essence of the decision. [...] Late communication therefore will not make the decision unlawful unless the probationer suffers injury. The complainant did not."
Keywords:
administrative delay; date; extension of contract; flaw; formal flaw; injury; lack of injury; probation report; probationary period; right to reply;
Judgment 810
61st Session, 1987
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The fact that only the chairman signed [the Appeal Board's report] is not in itself a flaw. It is not argued that the text fails to record the views of the majority of the Board."
Keywords:
flaw; formal flaw; formal requirements; internal appeals body; recommendation; report;
< previous | 1, 2, 3 | next >
|
