Bias (572,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Bias
Total judgments found: 135
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
Judgment 2373
97th Session, 2004
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant's contract was not renewed. He claims that his new supervisor was prejudiced against him. "While it is clear that the complainant's new supervisor did not have the same high view of his qualities as did [his previous supervisor], that is a long way from demonstrating that there has been an abuse of authority."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; contract; lack of evidence; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; supervisor; work appraisal;
Judgment 2351
97th Session, 2004
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7(c) and 8(a)
Extract:
When he was recruited the complainant provided a copy of a diploma but its authenticity was questioned a few years later. The matter was queried with the educational establishment and the Secretary-General then issued the complainant a written censure. The Tribunal considers that "there was not sufficient proof either that the diploma was not issued to the complainant [...] or that the latter had been informed that, according to the [educational establishment], he was not entitled to receive it. The Secretary-General might have enquired further into the aspects which remained uncertain, but did not do so. The 'likelihood' referred to by the Secretary-General, if it is not incontrovertibly ascertained, cannot make up for the lack of conclusive evidence. Based as it is on an arbitrary appraisal of the facts, the impugned decision as far as it concerns the disciplinary sanction must therefore be set aside. Although it did not give rise to a written decision, the non-renewal of the short-term contract was based on charges levelled against the complainant in the course of the disciplinary procedure. The mere cancellation of the disciplinary sanction must entail that of the decision of non-renewal."
Keywords:
bias; consequence; contract; decision; decision quashed; degree; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; executive head; grounds; implied decision; inquiry; investigation; lack of evidence; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; right; short-term; terms of appointment; warning;
Judgment 2299
96th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant's application for the post of technically qualified member of a board of appeal was unsuccessful. "The complainant considers that he was discriminated against because the Selection Board did not grant him an interview. Obviously the Board decided that, in the light of the candidacies submitted, an interview would not be necessary because it considered that it made procedural sense not to call a candidate who, in its opinion, appeared to be unsuitable for the vacancy concerned, which does not preclude the possibility of comparing the merits of all the candidates in the event of a subsequent challenge."
Keywords:
bias; candidate; competition; evidence; post; procedure before the tribunal; selection board;
Judgment 2278
96th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"As the titular head of the very administration whose conduct is being called into question, the President of the Office must be scrupulous in the performance of his function as final decision-maker in internal appeals. It is his duty not only to be fair and objective; his conduct must also make it manifest that he has been so. It is not enough to state, as the President appears to do in the impugned decision, that he thinks the administration has put forward the better case. That is not a reason but a conclusion. The internal appellate process is designed and intended to provide fair, satisfactory and rapid resolution of staff grievances in international organisations."
Keywords:
bias; decision; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; internal appeal; organisation's duties; purpose; safeguard;
Judgment 2090
92nd Session, 2002
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The organisation asserts that "Article 1010.1 allows it to terminate an appointment by giving one month's notice per year of service [...] The Tribunal observes that [...] 1010.1 may not be interpreted as authorising [the organisation] to terminate [fixed- term] contracts arbitrarily. Decisions of this kind must be based on unsatisfactory performance, or the interests of the service. Furthermore, there must be no breach of adversarial procedure nor any error of fact or of law, nor abuse of authority, nor obvious misappraisal of the facts."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1010.1 OF THE IFRC STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
abuse of power; adversarial proceedings; bias; contract; due process; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; notice; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; provision; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 2021
90th Session, 2001
International Office of Epizootics
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"Lack of impartiality in a tribunal is a serious matter and an allegation of this sort should be neither made nor taken lightly. It is, like any other breach of the principles of natural justice, a proper ground for seeking review of a judgment."
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; application for review; bias; burden of proof; general principle;
Consideration 21
Extract:
The complainant contends that the opinion of the President of the Tribunal was tainted with bias since he has the same nationality as a few of the organisation's senior officers. "This is simply unacceptable. International organisations by definition have no nationality and their officers and employees are drawn from citizens of many countries; it is the organisations and not their officers who appear as defendants in cases before the Tribunal and the nationality of the judges who hear those cases is wholly irrelevant."
Keywords:
application for review; bias; nationality; president of the tribunal;
Consideration 22
Extract:
The complainant fears that the opinion of a member of the Tribunal was tainted with bias since he has the same nationality as a few of the organisation's senior officers. "Applications for review are normally heard by the same panel which rendered the original decision; a complainant cannot, by making wholly frivolous and unsubstantiated allegations force one or more members of the panel to recuse themselves."
Keywords:
application for review; bias; general principle; nationality;
Consideration 23
Extract:
"The concerns expressed by the complainant with regard to the fact that [the President of the Tribunal] and [one of the organisation's senior officers] both attended the same school and that [the President] was Director of an institute at which [another senior officer] taught are [...] without merit [...] If his opinion were to be followed, students having attended an institution should be prevented from judging cases in which the names of other students of the same institution appear."
Keywords:
application for review; bias; president of the tribunal;
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 2004
90th Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
Out of six candidates, only the complainant was interviewed by video conference. "While the Tribunal is not to be understood as saying that a video conference is not a perfectly acceptable method of conducting interviews, care must always be taken to ensure that no candidate is given a potentially unfair advantage by that process. Flying one person across the ocean to be interviewed while leaving a competitor from the same area at home is open to the interpretation of unequal treatment."
Keywords:
bias; competition; discretion; equal treatment; flaw; limits; procedural flaw; remand;
Judgment 1912
88th Session, 2000
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The methodologies adopted by international organisations for setting and adjusting the remuneration of the staff, in principle, must enable results to be obtained that are stable, foreseeable and clearly understood [...] when the applicable method uses an external index, [...] not with a view to requiring the competent body to conform automatically to the index, but only as a simple orientation', which in itself is not a breach of any rights, the staff can only be protected against arbitrariness if the criteria used in deviating from the suggested orientation of the external index are objective, adequate and known to the staff."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821
Keywords:
adjustment; bias; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; criteria; duty to inform; organisation's duties; rule of another organisation; salary; scale;
Judgment 1888
87th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The Tribunal's jurisdiction is limited to the review of administrative decisions taken by international organisations affecting the employment conditions of their employees. Where such decisions are found to be reviewable and where they have caused harm, the Tribunal will exercise its jurisdiction to order reparation thereof. The Tribunal is not, however, a civil court of general jurisdiction in matters of delict and contract. Even where they may be causally related to injury suffered by someone, prejudice and malfeasance do not give rise to a claim for damages before the Tribunal unless they can be related to a specific administrative decision which has become final and against which the complainant has exhausted all available internal remedies."
Keywords:
bias; compensation; competence of tribunal; contract; decision; injury; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; limits; material damages; moral injury; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1881
87th Session, 1999
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 20-21
Extract:
"The organization argues that the supervisor's unflattering comments to the Reports Board concerning the complainant 'had nothing to do with the quality of his work during the period being reviewed by the Board'. Even if it were true, the submission is beside the point. Prejudicial comments made to a body advising the decision-maker by one of the parties to a dispute are often irrelevant to the actual substance of the dispute. They are nonetheless prejudicial. If such comments are made, an opportunity must be given to the other party to respond to them. By failing to do this the Reports Board breached its duty of fairness. The report of the Reports Board being vitiated, the decision of the Director-General which is based upon such report cannot stand and must be quashed."
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; bias; equity; flaw; injury; performance report; period; procedural flaw; supervisor; work appraisal;
Judgment 1779
85th Session, 1998
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The Tribunal will review the [restructuring] process insofar as it may involve personal prejudice, abuse of authority or similar defects. But it is not for the Tribunal to decide what a normal procedure' for restructuring might be."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; discretion; flaw; judicial review; limits; misuse of authority; reorganisation;
Judgment 1775
85th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Although evidence of personal prejudice is often concealed and such prejudice must be inferred from surrounding circumstances, that does not relieve the complainant, who has the burden of proving his allegations, from introducing evidence of sufficient quality and weight to persuade the Tribunal. Mere suspicion and unsupported allegations are clearly not enough, the less so where [...] the actions of the Organization which are alleged to have been tainted by personal prejudice are shown to have a verifiable objective justification."
Keywords:
bias; burden of proof; complainant; evidence; lack of evidence;
Judgment 1763
85th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15 and 17
Extract:
The complainant is accused of having cheated the Organisation by falsifying airline tickets intended for official travel. "[T]he Director of the Division of Personnel [...] was both the chairman of the Disciplinary Board and the head of the department conducting the initial investigation. That the Director of the Division of Personnel should be chairman of the Board is required by paragraph 13(a) of section 13, Part II, of the Agency's Administrative Manual and does not constitute a procedural flaw, but does give rise to a situation in which there is a grave danger of an actual breach of procedural fairness. That is what in fact occurred. As the chairman of the Disciplinary Board, the Director had to refrain from personal involvement in the investigation. He must not be both judge and policeman. That, however, is what happened on at least one occasion. [...] This constitutes a serious breach of due process. [...] As chairman of the Joint Disciplinary Board, the Director of the Division of Personnel had a duty to be and to appear to be impartial."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PARAGRAPH 13(A) OF SECTION 13, PART II, OF IAEA'S ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL
Keywords:
bias; conflict of interest; disciplinary body; disciplinary procedure; due process; inquiry; investigation; investigative body; procedural flaw;
Consideration 19
Extract:
The complainant is accused of having cheated the Organisation by falsifying airline tickets intended for official travel. "[T]he Appeals Board asked for and received a legal opinion from the Director of the Legal Division during the appeal. This [...] was a violation of due process because that Director had been a member of the Disciplinary Board, whose recommendation was under appeal. The Agency admits that the Director signed a legal opinion that had been prepared at the request of the Appeals Board. That opinion should not have been given by the Director and should have been rejected by the Appeals Board; the Director simply should not have been involved, in substance or in form, with the Appeals Board's recommendation. A member of the body appealed from may not give legal advice to the body which hears the appeal."
Keywords:
advisory body; advisory opinion; bias; composition of the internal appeals body; disciplinary procedure; equity; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedural flaw; report;
Judgment 1732
84th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
It has been plain "that an allegation of personal prejudice will rarely be susceptible of direct proof and must usually be established by inference: see Judgment 495 [...]. Where there is a rational and legitimate explanation for the decision, however, the Tribunal should not be overzealous to infer bad faith or improper motive simply because the individuals concerned do not enjoy good personal relations."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 495
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; decision; evidence; grounds; misuse of authority; working relations;
Judgment 1658
83rd Session, 1997
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The complainant asks the Tribunal 'to declare itself not neutral to give a judgment in this complaint because of the Tribunal's involvement (and especially of its members) in the Judgements 1041, 1296, 1297 and 1333.' The claim is not acceptable. The Tribunal will entertain each case that comes before it [...]. Besides, by lodging this complaint the complainant has acknowledged the Tribunal's competence to hear it. If he does not want the Tribunal to rule on his case, his remedy is to withdraw suit. He has not done so."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1041, 1296, 1297, 1333
Keywords:
bias; competence of tribunal; complaint; tribunal; withdrawal of suit;
Judgment 1553
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 17-18
Extract:
The complainant alleges that the bias which the Administration has shown towards her goes back to 1984, when she co-operated in an inquiry carried out by the Inspectorate General. One finding of the inquiry - she says - "nearly created difficulties" for the head of the division in which she was working. That official was later promoted to high office in the Organization and she alleges that countless disguised sanctions were imposed on her after the inquiry.
In the absence of direct evidence she is asking the Tribunal to infer some connection between the inquiry and later incidents and impute some ulterior and malicious motive to those who took decisions which affected her. The incidents are too remote, however, and the evidence she offers too tenuous for the Tribunal to be satisfied that her charge of bias against the Administration is sound.
Keywords:
bias;
Judgment 1412
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant alleges that the procedure that led to his assignment on a career path was flawed inasmuch as the official who sign the decision, the Director-General, was also at the material time leader of the division that the complainant was working in. "It may be a pity that at two decisive stages in the procedure one and the same person was called upon to choose the complainant's career path; but the coincidence was due to a duplication of function which in itself was not wrong. Only if the Director-General's decision proved not to be impartial and objective would it be set aside."
Keywords:
assignment; bias; career; flaw; judicial review; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1391
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Decisions taken by the organisation are subject to review on grounds such as bias, bad faith, malice and abuse of authority. When seeking to defend his interests by impugning any such decision, an employee is entitled to allege and attempt to establish such grounds. A fair decision cannot be reached upon such matters by an internal appeals body or by this Tribunal if witnesses, parties and their representatives are unable to speak candidly and without the risk of incurring a penalty for what they may say, and especially if one party is unduly inhibited by the fear that failure to prove his case my make him liable to disciplinary action by the other party."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; burden of proof; complainant; complaint; disciplinary measure; evidence; freedom of speech; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; misuse of authority; submissions; testimony; tribunal;
Judgment 1376
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
"Any organisation that is serious about deterring sexual harassment and consequential abuse of authority by a superior officer must be seen to take proper action. In particular victims of such behaviour must feel confident that it will take their allegations seriously and not let them be victimised on that account. In this case the WHO has utterly failed to protect the complainant's rights."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; breach; misuse of authority; moral injury; negligence; organisation's duties; right to reply; sexual harassment; staff member's interest; supervisor;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
|
