Provisional measures (164,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Provisional measures
Total judgments found: 6

• Judgment 2978

  
  110th Session, 2011
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  "[T]he mere fact that one of the candidates in a competition is temporarily holding the post to be filled does not render the procedure unlawful."

  Keywords:

  candidate; competition; procedural flaw; provisional measures;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2773

  
  106th Session, 2009
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  "Nor has the Tribunal found any evidence on file to suggest that the Organization displayed prejudice against the complainant. The circumstance which the complainant cites in support of this contention, namely that he was suspended from his duties on the basis of Staff Rules, cannot be construed in that way, because such a suspension is only an interim, precautionary measure which does not at all prejudge the outcome of the proceedings (see, for example, Judgments 1927, under 5, and 2365, under 4(a))."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1927, 2365
  

  Keywords:

  bias; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; measure of distraint; organisation's duties; provisional measures; staff regulations and rules; suspension; suspensive action;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2698

  
  104th Session, 2008
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 13-14

  Extract:

  The complainant was notified of a number of serious charges against him and was informed that he would be suspended from duty with pay until the end of the investigation into the charges. "The Director General did not [...] implement the Appeal Board's recommendation that he should conclude with all due speed the investigation into the allegations of serious misconduct against the complainant and should take a decision within a reasonable time. In fact he did not conduct the investigation with the dispatch required by the Tribunal's case law and by the circumstances of the case, and he thus caused an unjustified delay in the handling of the case. The explanations given by the Organization in its submissions are irrelevant, particularly because they do not indicate that the completion of the investigation was delayed through any fault on the part of the complainant.
  By prolonging an essentially temporary measure beyond a reasonable time, without any valid grounds, thereby placing the complainant in a situation of uncertainty as to his further career, the Organization caused him moral injury which must be redressed by awarding him the amount of 10,000 United States dollars."

  Keywords:

  allowance; breach; career; case law; compensation; consequence; decision; delay; executive head; grounds; injury; inquiry; internal appeals body; investigation; moral injury; organisation's duties; provisional measures; reasonable time; recommendation; serious misconduct; suspensive action;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2365

  
  97th Session, 2004
  Universal Postal Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4(a)

  Extract:

  "The suspension of the complainant was an interim, precautionary measure, which was to last as long as the disciplinary procedure. It was ordered without hearing the complainant's views on the matter beforehand, but the latter's right to be heard was safeguarded since he later had an opportunity to exercise it before the impugned decision was taken. In any case, a decision to suspend need not necessarily be followed by a substantive decision to impose a disciplinary sanction (see Judgment 1927, under 5). Nevertheless, since it imposes a constraint on the staff member, suspension must be legally founded, justified by the requirements of the organisation and in accordance with the principle of proportionality. A measure of suspension will not be ordered except in cases of serious misconduct. Such a decision lies at the discretion of the Director-General. It is subject therefore to only limited review by the Tribunal, that is to say, if it was taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or was based on an error of fact or of law, or overlooked some essential fact, or was tainted with abuse of authority, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence (see, for instance, Judgment 2262, under 2)."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1927, 2262
  

  Keywords:

  abuse of power; breach; condition; decision; decision-maker; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; discretion; disregard of essential fact; executive head; formal flaw; formal requirements; judicial review; limits; measure of distraint; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; official; organisation's duties; period; procedural flaw; proportionality; provisional measures; right to reply; suspensive action;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 862

  
  63rd Session, 1987
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "Suspension is temporary repeal: while in force it makes the text void. What distinguishes it from repeal is that it is not final, its purpose being to provide against some temporary contingency, and it need only be lifted for the text to come into force again. But repeal is final and once a text has been repealed the law-maker has to adopt a new one to bring the provisions back into effect."

  Keywords:

  binding character; difference; effect; enforcement; period; provision; provisional measures; staff regulations and rules; suspensive action; written rule;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 57

  
  10th Session, 1962
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations

  Extract:

  "Although under Article 19 of its Rules of court the Tribunal may prescribe provisional measures during the preliminary examination of a complaint before it, no such measures can be contemplated unless they are directed to ensuring a fully satisfactory preliminary examination of the case, and unless they are conducive to that end, and such as to enable the Tribunal to issue a judgment based on a full knowledge of the facts or serving an effective purpose."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 19 OF THE RULES
  
  

  Keywords:

  complaint; iloat statute; provisional measures; purpose; submissions;