Internal appeal (86, 87, 668, 695, 752, 783,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Internal appeal
Total judgments found: 463
< 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 | next >
Judgment 3999
126th Session, 2018
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to reclassify her post.
Consideration 12
Extract:
The time that elapsed from the filing of the internal appeal until the Appeal Board issued its conclusions was approximately 16 months. This included a period during which extensions were granted with respect to the filing of the submissions while there were attempts to reach a settlement. The Director General’s final decision was notified to the complainant within the time limit provided by the Staff Regulations and Rules. In these circumstances the Tribunal does not consider the duration of the internal appeal proceedings to be excessive.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; internal appeal;
Judgment 3993
126th Session, 2018
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the direct appointment of Mr E. to the position of Legal Adviser.
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant proffers various submissions to support his contention that the email of 2 December 2013, which he obviously received, did not satisfy the requirement of notification. [...]
Importantly, however, the complainant submits that the email of 2 December 2013 left it unclear which post Mr E. was to fill, and that he was only properly informed of the decision concerning the appointment of Mr E. when he received the email confirmation from the Human Resources Branch [...]. The Tribunal considers that, while the email of 2 December 2013 notified the complainant of the appointment of Mr E. as Legal Adviser, it did not specify whether the appointment was at the D-1 level, which the complainant held, or at the D-2 level, for which the complainant wished to apply. It was by the email of 10 April 2014, which confirmed implicitly that the appointment was at the D-2 level, that the complainant was properly notified. Accordingly, his request for review [...] was made within the required time limit. It was therefore receivable.
Keywords:
internal appeal;
Judgment 3966
125th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant objects to the behaviour of his director which he characterises as harassment.
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant’s claim for an award of punitive damages for the delay will be dismissed. The Tribunal has stated, for example in Judgment 2935, consideration 5, that an award of punitive damages can be made only in exceptional circumstances, for instance where an organisation’s conduct has been in gross breach of its obligation to act in good faith. There is no evidence that the EPO acted in bad faith with respect to the delay in the internal appeal proceedings. However, the complainant will be awarded moral damages in the amount of 6,000 euros, particularly given the length of the delay and the impact of that delay on him in his personal circumstances.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2935
Keywords:
delay; delay in internal procedure; internal appeal; punitive damages;
Judgment 3965
125th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contends that the EPO did not properly address or investigate his claim of harassment.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The President’s decision, communicated by the letter of 13 October 2009, was based on the Ombudsman’s comments, which did not comply with Article 11 of Circular No. 286, and the decision itself did not correspond to what Article 12 of the Circular required. Most importantly, the decision of 13 October 2009 did not clearly reject the complainant’s harassment complaint or determine any other course of action on it. The complainant was therefore not only deprived of his right to have his complaint dealt with in accordance with the applicable rules, but was also misled as to the possibilities of challenging a decision. Accordingly, the decision of 13 October 2009 must be set aside. As this decision was ambiguous and misleading, the filing of the internal appeal on 19 April 2010 comes within the scope of the exceptions that the Tribunal has established for accepting a late internal appeal (see, for example, Judgments 1466, consideration 5, 2722, consideration 3, and 3406, consideration 13). To the extent that the IAC’s majority opinion and the impugned decision of the President were based on the argument that the appeal was irreceivable, they are tainted with an error of law and the impugned decision of 14 February 2012 will therefore be set aside.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1466, 2722, 3406
Keywords:
exception; internal appeal; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 3963
125th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant alleges that the Organisation has breached its duty of care in relation to possible taxation of the invalidity allowance.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant also requests compensation in the amount of 5,000 euros for the moral injury caused by the excessive duration of the proceedings which, he contends, lasted “more than [six] years”. It must be noted that the duration alleged by the complainant includes phases after October 2007 when informal requests were made. However, for the purpose of determining the duration of the proceedings, the starting date must be deemed to be that on which the internal appeal was filed, namely 7 May 2010. As the date on which it was dismissed was 5 February 2014, the internal appeal proceedings lasted almost four years and not “more than [six] years”. Nevertheless, the Tribunal considers that this duration is still excessive. The EPO has not explained why it needed virtually two years as from the date on which the internal appeal was filed to submit its position thereupon. In view of the foregoing, the Tribunal finds that the complainant must be awarded moral damages in the amount of 3,500 euros for the inordinate length of the internal appeal proceedings.
Keywords:
delay; delay in internal procedure; internal appeal;
Judgment 3947
125th Session, 2018
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to terminate his fixed-term contract.
Consideration 8
Extract:
Principle has it that the right to lodge an internal appeal is not lost if the appeal is sent to the wrong body. The following was accordingly relevantly stated in Judgment 3027, consideration 7:
“[I]n Judgment 1832, under 6, it was held that a staff member did not lose his right to appeal simply because the appeal was sent to the wrong internal body. It was said in that case: ‘If the staff member appeals in time but makes the wrong choice between Council and President, there is nothing in the rules to prevent correction of the mistake. After all, both Council and President are authorities within one and the same Organisation.’.”
This statement makes it plain that in order to rely on the foregoing principle, the appeal, in whatever form and to whomever addressed, must be lodged in time.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1832, 3027
Keywords:
internal appeal; right of appeal;
Judgment 3945
125th Session, 2018
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges her 2013 performance evaluation.
Consideration 4
Extract:
Precedent has it that a complainant may enlarge on the arguments presented before internal appeal bodies, but may not submit new claims to the Tribunal (see, in particular, Judgments 2837, under 3, and 3420, under 10, and the case law cited therein). The Tribunal will consider any additional plea the complainant has made that may be relevant only to support her claims concerning her 2013 performance evaluation, which is the only receivable aspect of the present complaint.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2837, 3420
Keywords:
internal appeal; new claim; new plea; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 3943
125th Session, 2018
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants seek a redefinition of their employment relationships.
Considerations 5 and 9
Extract:
The Tribunal considers that when an internal appeal is tainted with a flaw – other than late submission – which prevents it from being considered as properly filed, it is for the appeals body, in the exercise of its duty of care, to enable the complainant to correct the appeal by granting her or him a reasonable period of time in which to do so (for a similar case, see Judgment 3127, under 10).
[...]
In the particular circumstances of the case, and given the nature of the flaw that affected the complainants’ internal appeals, there is no reason to award them moral damages in respect of the unlawfulness of the impugned decisions or the delay in processing their appeals. Nor will they be awarded costs.
Keywords:
duty of care; internal appeal;
Judgment 3936
125th Session, 2018
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who held the grade P-5 post of Head of UNESCO’s National Office in Kinshasa, challenges the decision to transfer her to Paris.
Consideration 3
Extract:
Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal provides that a complaint is not receivable unless the decision impugned is a final decision and the person concerned has exhausted such other means of redress as are open to her or him under the applicable staff regulations. In accordance with the Tribunal’s case law, to satisfy this requirement a complainant must not only follow the prescribed internal procedure for appeal but must follow it properly and in particular observe any time limit that may be set for the purpose of that procedure (see, for example, Judgment 3296, under 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3296
Keywords:
internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The Tribunal observes that at the time when she submitted her protest, and indeed when she received a reply to it, the complainant, who was initially assigned to Kinshasa, was on maternity leave. Thus she had not actually taken up her duties as chargée de mission in the Bureau of Field Coordination, to which she had theoretically been assigned from 1 March 2013, and could not in any event be regarded as “stationed” at Headquarters for the purposes of paragraph 7(c) of the Statutes of the Appeals Board.
It follows that the Director-General wrongly dismissed the complainant’s appeal as time-barred, since it was submitted within the two-month period running from her receipt of the memorandum of 1 March 2013.
Keywords:
internal appeal; late appeal;
Judgment 3934
125th Session, 2018
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to transfer him and not to extend his appointment beyond the statutory retirement age.
Consideration 4
Extract:
Although the complaint of moral harassment which the complainant had filed against the Director of the Office was the subject of separate proceedings, in his appeal against the decision not to extend his appointment the complainant also alleged that that decision stemmed from a wish to discriminate and retaliate against him which itself formed part of the harassment. [...] [I]n its opinion of 11 July 2014 the Appeals Board noted, before recommending that his appeal be dismissed, that “[t]he allegations on discrimination, harassment and punitiveness [were] the subject matters of another appeal and they [would] be decided on in [another] case brought before the Appeals Board” by the complainant.
In adopting that approach, the Appeals Board committed an error of law. If those allegations had proved to be well founded, they would have substantiated the existence of flaws rendering the contested decision unlawful; hence the Appeals Board could not properly recommend that the aforementioned decision be confirmed without first having determined whether they were valid.
Keywords:
harassment; internal appeal; mistake of law; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 3933
125th Session, 2018
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment.
Consideration 12
Extract:
As to delay in the internal appeals process, the Tribunal notes that the internal appeal to the Appeals Committee was lodged on 23 June 2014. The Committee, it appears, did not meet to consider the case until 14 October 2015 and reported on 19 February 2016 resulting in a decision of the Director-General on 9 May 2016. This delay is excessive (though the time taken for the initial appeal to the Director-General is not) and no explanation or answer is provided by the FAO in its reply. Indeed it makes no submissions on this question at all. The complainant is entitled to moral damages for this delay.
Keywords:
delay; delay in internal procedure; internal appeal;
Judgment 3929
125th Session, 2018
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish her post and to terminate her appointment while she was on sick leave.
Consideration 13
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law, an international organisation has a duty of care which, in relation to the exercise of the right of appeal, obliges the organisation to assist a staff member who is mistaken in the exercise of that right. If the staff member has mistakenly requested a review of a decision to the wrong authority, that authority must forward the request to the appropriate one (see Judgments 3754, under 11, and 2345, under 1).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2345, 3754
Keywords:
duty of care; internal appeal;
Judgment 3928
125th Session, 2018
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish his post and to terminate his appointment while he was on sick leave.
Consideration 14
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law, an international organisation has a duty of care which, in relation to the exercise of the right of appeal, obliges the organisation to assist a staff member who is mistaken in the exercise of that right. If the staff member has mistakenly requested a review of a decision to the wrong authority, that authority must forward the request to the appropriate one (see Judgments 3754, under 11, and 2345, under 1).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2345, 3754
Keywords:
duty of care; internal appeal;
Judgment 3923
125th Session, 2018
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision of the Chair of the Appeal Board to dismiss as time-barred his internal appeal against the non-confirmation of his appointment and his separation while on sick leave.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; internal appeal; late appeal; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 3906
125th Session, 2018
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of her fixed-term appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; internal appeal; internal appeals body; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 3905
125th Session, 2018
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of his fixed-term appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; internal appeal; internal appeals body; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 3903
125th Session, 2018
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of his fixed-term appointment.
Consideration 6
Extract:
Pursuant to Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Tribunal’s Statute, a complaint is not receivable unless the complainant has exhausted the internal means of redress. This means that a complaint will not be receivable if the underlying internal appeal was irreceivable (see Judgment 3758, consideration 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3758
Keywords:
internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted;
Judgment 3849
124th Session, 2017
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the non-renewal of his fixed-term contract.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal emphasises that it is desirable that an organisation make it absolutely clear in a communication that it constitutes notice that the contract will not be renewed and language to this effect should be used. Also, it is desirable for the organisation to say in such a communication that it manifests a final decision against which the official can appeal in a manner prescribed in the organisation’s rules and regulations.
Keywords:
administrative decision; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; notification;
Judgment 3846
124th Session, 2017
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant objects to the working conditions to which she was subjected during a secondment and contends that the ITU breached the rules on performance appraisals.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The Tribunal is of the opinion that, as the [organisation] itself recognises, the events to which the Appeal Board referred do not constitute “extraneous, unforeseeable and compelling factors”. The defendant organisation may not therefore rely on force majeure to justify a failure to comply with the time limit for the submission of the Board’s report. In this case, however, this flaw had no practical implications and hence does not warrant an award of damages.
Keywords:
force majeure; internal appeal; moral injury;
Judgment 3845
124th Session, 2017
African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment at the end of his probationary period.
Consideration 4
Extract:
The way in which the internal means of redress are organised in the Staff Regulations and its annexes is rather unclear. Since the decision [...] did not specify what remedies were available to challenge it, it is understandable in any event that, even with a lawyer’s assistance, the complainant was hesitant to file a complaint directly with the Tribunal without first submitting the appeal to the Chairperson of the Committee of Ambassadors provided for in Annex VIII, paragraph 3, of the Staff Regulations.
In the Tribunal’s view, it is hence justified to apply the firm precedent that while rules of procedure should be strictly complied with, they must not set traps for staff members who are trying to defend their rights and must not be construed with too much formalism, thus allowing the authority to avoid, unlawfully, addressing the merits of the case (see Judgments 1832, under 6, 2882, under 6, 3407, under 19, 3423, under 9(b), and 3759, under 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1832, 2882, 3407, 3423, 3759
Keywords:
internal appeal;
< 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 | next >
|
