|
|
 |
|
|
Member State (195, 196,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Member State
Total judgments found: 49
1, 2, 3 | next >
Judgment 4075
127th Session, 2019
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the Global Fund’s decision to amend the methodology used for the calculation of the tax equalization payments made to eligible staff members.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; general decision; individual decision; member state; tax; tax equalization;
Judgment 3281
116th Session, 2014
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Tax refunds due as a result of tax credits.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; domestic law; member state; organisation's duties; payment; reckoning; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; tax;
Judgment 2944
109th Session, 2010
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 45
Extract:
"By not paying the sums owed to creditors for more than ten years and not complying with several court rulings ordering her to meet her obligations, the complainant, an international civil servant, plainly did not show due respect for local laws and institutions and for the public policy of the host State [...]."
Keywords:
debt; domestic law; judgment of the tribunal; member state; misconduct; municipal court; staff member's duties;
Judgment 2865
108th Session, 2010
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4(b)
Extract:
Article 72 of the Service Regulations for Permanent Employees of the European Patent Office, the EPO's secretariat, concerns the expatriation allowance. Article 72(1) reads as follows:
"An expatriation allowance shall be payable to permanent employees who, at the time they take up their duties or are transferred:
a) hold the nationality of a country other than the country in which they will be serving, and
b) were not permanently resident in the latter country for at least three years, no account being taken of previous service in the administration of the country conferring the said nationality or with international organisations."
"The country in which the permanent employee is permanently resident, within the meaning of Article 72(1)(b) of the Service Regulations, is that in which he or she is effectively living, that is to say the country with which he or she maintains the closest objective and factual links. The closeness of these links must be such that it may reasonably be presumed that the person concerned is resident in the country in question and intends to remain there. A permanent employee interrupts his or her permanent residence in a country when he or she effectively leaves that country with the intention - which must be objectively and reasonably credible in the light of all the circumstances - to settle for some length of time in another country (see Judgment 2653, under 3)."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Article 72(1) of the Service Regulations for Permanent Employees of the European Patent Office
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2653
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; appointment; condition; definition; duty station; intention of parties; member state; nationality; non-resident allowance; official; organisation; payment; period; residence; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
Judgment 2569
102nd Session, 2007
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The vacancy notice of the post the complainant applied for stipulated that nationals of all Member States of CERN - including Switzerland - could apply. She was selected for the post but was dismissed after CERN discovered that in her application form she had stated that she held Swiss nationality whereas she had not yet acquired it. "[W]hile it is true that the fact that the complainant was married to a Swiss national should in principle have enabled her to obtain Swiss nationality under the 'facilitated naturalisation' procedure, it is equally true that at the time she filled out her application form she did not hold Swiss nationality and had not even applied for it. [...] By making a false declaration, the complainant was guilty of misconduct which, when it came to light after her recruitment, was sufficient to invalidate her appointment and to justify the imposition of a disciplinary sanction on the grounds that she fell short of the standards of loyalty and integrity that the Organization is entitled to expect of its staff. Although the complainant maintains that by imposing the disputed sanction the defendant breached the terms of her appointment and the applicable provisions of CERN’s Staff Rules and Regulations, she does not substantiate those allegations in any way, nor does she identify any breach of the rules of procedure followed by the Organization. The complaint must therefore be dismissed."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; date; disciplinary measure; marital status; member state; misconduct; misrepresentation; nationality; organisation; post; reinstatement; safeguard; staff member's duties; termination of employment; vacancy notice;
Judgment 2549
101st Session, 2006
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10, 11 and 13
Extract:
The complainant, a Danish national, was employed by the ILO from 3 January 2002 to 2 January 2005. She had entered into a registered partnership with her same-sex partner. On taking up her functions, she submitted a Certificate of Registered Partnership drawn up in accordance with the Danish Act on registered partnership and asked to be granted dependency benefits, designating her partner as her spouse. Her request was rejected. The Office stated that it was "in a position to recognise same-sex marriages immediately where the legislation of the country of the staff member's nationality recognises such marriages." It has in fact recently recognised such same-sex marriages where the national legislation defines same-sex marriages as spousal relationships.
"The question is whether the broad interpretation of the term 'spouse' already given by the Office in the case of a marriage recognised by the legislation of the country of the staff member's nationality should have been extended to unions between same-sex partners which are not expressly designated as marriages under the national law of the staff member concerned. The Tribunal feels that a purely nominalistic approach to this issue would be excessively formalistic and is inappropriate in view of the fact that the situation varies from one country to another and that great care must be taken not to treat officials placed in comparable situations unequally: it is not because a country has opted for legislation that admits same-sex unions while refusing to describe them as marriages that officials who are nationals of that State should necessarily be denied certain rights. As pointed out in Judgment 1715 [...], there may be situations in which the status of spouse can be recognised in the absence of a marriage, provided that the staff member concerned can show the precise provisions of local law on which he or she relies. It is therefore necessary to determine whether in the present case the provisions of Danish law enable the complainant and her partner to be considered as 'spouses' in the meaning of the applicable regulations."
After having examined the provisions of the Danish Act on registered partnership, the Tribunal finds that "the Director-General was wrong [...] to refuse to recognise the status of spouse for the complainant's partner [and orders] the ILO [to] give full effect to this ruling by granting the complainant the benefits denied to her during the time of her employment".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1715
Keywords:
analogy; applicable law; burden of proof; condition; consequence; contract; declaration of recognition; definition; dependant; difference; domestic law; equal treatment; exception; executive head; family allowance; interpretation; judicial review; marital status; member state; nationality; official; provision; refusal; request by a party; right; same-sex marriage; social benefits; status of complainant;
Judgment 2527
101st Session, 2006
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"As it has ruled on several occasions (see, for instance, Judgment 1456), the Tribunal may not order an organisation to seek an agreement with any State or institution."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1456
Keywords:
case law; claim; competence of tribunal; member state; receivability of the complaint;
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"Article 12(1) of the Pension Regulations allowed the transfer of pension rights acquired by employees under a pension scheme prior to joining the Office only 'provided that that scheme allow[ed] such transfers to be made'. In the present case, it appears from the submissions that the INPS has not yet accepted the transfer to the EPO of pension rights acquired by employees who, like the complainant, were affiliated to the Italian state pension scheme. However regrettable it may be that employees of the Office in the position of the complainant are left at a disadvantage, the Office cannot be blamed for not amending the provisions of Article 12 at the risk of having to bear the costs of the transfer: the consent of the Italian authorities is clearly necessary before any such transfer can take place.
Nevertheless, the Organisation must not have shown negligence or ill will in submitting the problem raised by the complainant to the Italian authorities. It emerges from the submissions, however, that the Italian authorities were approached unsuccessfully in 1992 and 1998 and [again in] 2004 [...]. The Organisation cannot therefore be accused of having 'blocked' the situation and the complainant is not justified in deeming its conduct to be unlawful."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Article 12(1) of the Pension Regulations
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; equal treatment; member state; negligence; organisation's duties; pension; pension entitlements; staff regulations and rules; transfer of pension rights;
Judgment 2296
96th Session, 2004
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[T]he right of an international civil servant to recover from his employer the taxes which he has been forced to pay on his tax-exempt income cannot be made contingent upon the employer's right to recover those amounts from the national government concerned."
Keywords:
condition; member state; official; organisation; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; right; tax;
Judgment 2292
96th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
Even if "the Member States of the [Organisation] are all signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights, the Organisation [...] as such is not a member of the Council of Europe and is not bound by the Convention in the same way as signatory states. Nevertheless, the general principles enshrined in the Convention, particularly the principles of non-discrimination and the protection of property rights, are part of human rights, which, [...] in compliance with the Tribunal's case law, apply to relations with staff."
Keywords:
applicable law; case law; equal treatment; general principle; international civil service principles; international instrument; member state; organisation's duties; provision; right; rule of another organisation; universal declaration of human rights; working relations;
Judgment 2256
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 14-16
Extract:
"With regard to the role of a tax reimbursement agreement, the Tribunal stated the following [in judgment 2032]: "It would be strange indeed if the absence of [a tax reimbursement agreement (TRA)] could be invoked by an international organisation or its member states to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. If a member state in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that state."[T]he evident corollary of that statement is that it would similarly be strange if the existence of an agreement could be invoked by an international organisation to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. Such an agreement is meant to set the terms of a member state's commitment to refund an organisation for tax reimbursements. It must, however, conform with international law and cannot be used to undermine the fundamental principles of tax exemption recalled by the Tribunal. Thus, even if the text of the TRA had the reach which the organisation contends for it, which may be doubted, it would simply be unenforceable as being contrary to law. [...] It is likewise with the provisions of the Staff Regulations which, in the organisation's submissions, would limit the complainant's right to tax reimbursement to the amounts actually paid to the organisation by the United States under the TRA. Like the TRA itself, the Staff Regulations must be in conformity with the requirements of the law and where they are not, they are simply unenforceable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2032
Keywords:
equal treatment; international civil service principles; member state; no provision; privileges and immunities; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 2232
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the decision impugned before the Tribunal is not an administrative decision, but essentially a political one. The Tribunal holds that "the complainant was an international civil servant who was entitled to appeal to the Tribunal against a decision to terminate his appointment. That decision must be viewed as an administrative decision, even though it was taken by the Conference of the States parties."
Keywords:
decision; executive body; executive head; grounds; iloat; interpretation; member state; official; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; termination of employment;
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. "In accordance with the established case law of all international administrative tribunals, the Tribunal reaffirms that the independence of international civil servants is an essential guarantee, not only for the civil servants themselves, but also for the proper functioning of international organisations. In the case of heads of organisations, that independence is protected, inter alia, by the fact that they are appointed for a limited term of office. To concede that the authority in which the power of appointment is vested - in this case the Conference of the States parties of the Organisation - may terminate that appointment in its unfettered discretion, would constitute an unacceptable violation of the principles on which international organisations' activities are founded [...], by rendering officials vulnerable to pressures and to political change. The possibility that a measure of the kind taken against the complainant may, exceptionally, be justified in cases of grave misconduct cannot be excluded, but such a measure, being punitive in nature, could only be taken in full compliance with the principle of due process, following a procedure enabling the individual concerned to defend his or her case effectively before an independent and impartial body."
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; appointment; breach; case law; condition; discretion; exception; executive body; executive head; fixed-term; general principle; hidden disciplinary measure; iloat; independence; internal appeals body; limits; member state; official; organisation; right to reply; safeguard; serious misconduct; termination of employment; tribunal;
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability because the matter was not referred to the Appeals Council. "In the present case, that procedure was not and clearly could not have been followed. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how the Director-General, stripped of his functions, could have appealed to the Appeals Council established under his own authority, against a decision of the Conference of the States parties, with a view to obtaining a final decision by the new Director-General. [...] An appeal to the Appeals Council was inconceivable, and the impugned decision was clearly a final decision - within the meaning of Article VII of the Tribunal's Statute [...] in that situation, a direct appeal to the Tribunal [...] was clearly the only remedy available to the complainant."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
absence of final decision; competence; decision; direct appeal to tribunal; executive body; executive head; grounds; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; member state; procedure before the tribunal; purpose; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; termination of employment;
Judgment 2207
94th Session, 2003
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The affair the complainant had with a national of the country of the duty station led to a series of incidents. "In view of the particular circumstances of the case, it is perfectly legitimate to conclude that it was in the organization's interest to terminate the complainant's assignment in Nairobi in order to maintain an untroubled working atmosphere in the service and to preserve its good relations with the host country. However, in accordance with the Tribunal's case law (see, in particular, Judgments 269 and 1231), the defendant could not terminate the complainant's appointment solely on that basis, without having taken appropriate steps to find him a new assignment."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 269, 1231
Keywords:
case law; conduct; duty station; member state; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; organisation's reputation; reassignment; termination of employment; transfer; working relations;
Judgment 2190
94th Session, 2003
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The organization has a discretion to assess, in the context of its relations with a Member State, which are beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether it is appropriate to lift the immunity from legal process of its employees (see in this respect Judgments 933 and 1543)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 933, 1543
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; discretion; judicial review; member state; organisation; privileges and immunities; tribunal; waiver of immunity;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is incomprehensible that no internal administrative investigation was conducted following an accident which involved a [...] vehicle [of the organization] driven by an employee of the organization in the context of an official mission, and which caused the death of two passengers, one of whom was a [...] staff member [of the organization], as well as the serious injuries suffered by the complainant. The fact that the Namibian authorities opened their own enquiry could not in any way exempt the organization from ascertaining whether the condition of the vehicle, the preparation of the mission and, more generally, the circumstances of the accident revealed any administrative failure, the consequences of which it would have a duty to bear. [...] There is no evidence to suggest that any internal enquiry whatsoever was conducted in connection with this accident. This failure caused the complainant an injury which the Tribunal considers to be equitably compensated by an award of 5,000 United States dollars."
Keywords:
injury; inquiry; investigation; material damages; member state; misconduct; moral injury; omission; organisation's duties; professional accident; service-incurred;
Judgment 2032
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Exemption from national taxes is an essential condition of employment in the international civil service and is an important guarantee of independence and objectivity. It cannot be made to depend upon the whim of national taxing authorities [...]."
Keywords:
independence; member state; official; privileges and immunities; safeguard; salary; tax;
Consideration 14
Extract:
"Where a State imposes tax upon its nationals who are international civil servants in receipt of income some of which is tax exempt and some of which is not the only proper method of determining how much tax should actually be paid is to calculate the hypothetical amount which would be due if the exempt income had not been received."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; reckoning; salary; tax;
Consideration 15
Extract:
"If a Member State in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that State."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"One of the purposes of staff assessment is surely to put the organisation in funds to protect its employees against States which refuse to recognise their tax-exempt status."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; purpose; refund; refusal; salary; staff assessment; tax;
Consideration 17
Extract:
"If the organisation does not [...] contest the exempt status of the complainant, it is its duty to protect him against the claims of the authorities of a Member State, to reimburse him the amount of tax he has paid to the State, and to employ its own considerable power, authority and influence to have the [...] authorities [of that state] change their position. [...] By requiring him to appeal against his [...] tax assessment while conceding the tax-exempt status of his [...] income the organisation has failed in its duty to the complainant."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Judgment 1821
86th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"All comments and statements by member states were made within the context of the proper decision-making organs of the [organisation's] structure. To the extent that the complainants are attempting to show that member states tried to influence the decision through the committees or the governing body to which they belonged, it was perfectly proper for them to do so. An international organisation would not exist without its member states and the proper means for them to exert influence over an organisation they create is precisely that of debate, discussion and persuasion within the committees and governing body of the organisation itself."
Keywords:
decision; discretion; executive body; independence; legislative body; member state;
Judgment 1800
86th Session, 1999
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The complainants' [...] plea is that the sole purpose of the change in the rules on the [post adjustment] index [decided by the ICSC] was to save money. The Tribunal need only quote the reply it gave to that argument in Judgment 1776: 'If the new method is lawful the fact that applying it saves member States money cannot in itself be a flaw.' And the evidence suggests no misuse of authority by the [ICSC], which, against the odds, tries to find from time to time objective criteria for reckoning post adjustment throughout the common system."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1776
Keywords:
abuse of power; amendment to the rules; budgetary reasons; case law; icsc decision; member state; misuse of authority; official; post adjustment; reckoning; right; salary;
Judgment 1791
86th Session, 1999
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"In support of their plea of abuse of authority the complainants accuse [the Organization] of scorning [...] the independence of the international civil service by giving in to a single government that was itself defying the principle [...]. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that [the Organization] was yielding to [the] insistence [of one State]. The impugned decision was taken because of a resolution by the Council, the sovereign body that decides things scientific, technical and administrative [...]."
Keywords:
abuse of power; breach; discretion; executive body; general principle; independence; international civil service principles; member state; misuse of authority; official;
Judgment 1733
84th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The authorities of the complainant's home country, who were asked to give an opinion about giving him a promotion, declined their support for him but gave no reasons. If the country "had given a reason the Director General would have had to consider whether it was sound or not and whether refusing him the appointment was in the Agency's best interests. since it offered none, he had no basis on which to exercise his discretion. The complainant was fully qualified for promotion; his abilities were well known to the Agency and appreciated. The paramount consideration mentioned in Article VII.d [of the IAEA Staff Regulations] was heeded, namely seeking staff of the highest standards of efficiency, technical competence and integrity. The reason stated by the Agency for refusing him the appointment which he would otherwise have been granted is therefore untenable and acting from that reason amounted to a mistake in law."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE VII.D OF THE IAEA STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
discretion; independence; member state; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; promotion; qualifications; staff regulations and rules;
Considerations 16-17
Extract:
"In the performance of their duties the Director General and staff may not seek or receive instructions from any source external to the Agency. For the Director General to allow a member State a veto on the appointment of a staff member is to 'receive instructions' from an external source and an interference with the paramount consideration of securing staff of the right calibre. Paragraph 68 of the Administrative Manual and the sentence 'accordingly government sponsorship will be required' [...] are null and void as being contrary to [...] the Statute."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PARAGRAPH 68 OF THE IAEA MANUAL
Keywords:
appointment; independence; member state; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1660
83rd Session, 1997
European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
Insofar as the seven Member States continued to be jointly responsible for the Staff Insurance Scheme (SIS) "the delegation of authority was quite proper. What is more, it was quite understandable since the seven countries still owed the serving and the retired staff joint responsibility for safeguarding their entitlements. That is how the three departing countries were associated in the decisions of the future of the SIS. Besides, the decisions were unanimous, and there can have been no procedural flaw in the mere attendance - which was highly desirable anyway - of representatives of the former Member States as well." The plea of incompetence must, therefore, be rejected.
Keywords:
competence; decision-maker; delegated authority; executive body; member state; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1659
83rd Session, 1997
European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
Having lost three out of seven members and having a "working budget that was but a fraction of what it had been before, it was therefore only reasonable for [EFTA] to consider overhauling the Secretariat and go ahead with the abolition of units and then of posts. [...] It was the EFTA Council of seven member States that resolved to wind up the Secretariat, pay off the permanent employees and let fixed-term appointments run out. It saw that as the only proper course because of political uncertainty and lack of money to pay the staff after 30 June 1995. The seven States also wanted to safeguard the freedom of the four remaining members to set up a smaller Secretariat which matched the smaller membership. There was no mistake of law in the Council's reasoning."
Keywords:
abolition of post; budgetary reasons; discretion; judicial review; member state; non-renewal of contract; organisation; reorganisation; separation from service; termination of employment;
1, 2, 3 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
