|
|
 |
|
|
Reprimand (511,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Reprimand
Total judgments found: 7
Judgment 4616
135th Session, 2023
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision finding that she had harassed another staff member and imposing a written reprimand on her.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; disciplinary measure; harassment; reprimand;
Judgment 4392
131st Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to withdraw the disciplinary sanction of reprimand and remove it from her personal file.
Consideration 11
Extract:
[The complainant’s] request for moral damages [...] will be rejected as she has failed to articulate by evidence, rather than by conjecture, the impact which the insertion of the reprimand into her personal file had upon her.
Keywords:
moral damages; personal file; reprimand;
Judgment 2752
105th Session, 2008
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The Tribunal exercises only a limited power of review in the case of warnings or reprimands which are not of a disciplinary nature. As pointed out in Judgments 274 and 403:
'The Tribunal 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.'
In Judgment 274 it was also explained that '[a] warning or reprimand must be based on unsatisfactory conduct since what it is saying in effect is that if the conduct is repeated a disciplinary measure may be taken'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 274, 403
Keywords:
abuse of power; censure; condition; conduct; disciplinary measure; disregard of essential fact; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw; reprimand; unsatisfactory service; warning;
Judgment 2706
104th Session, 2008
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant having reported that she had been sexually harassed by her supervisor, the latter was verbally reprimanded. The Organization asserts that the complainant has failed to discharge the burden of proof with respect to her allegations of harassment. "[I]n imposing a disciplinary sanction on the complainant's supervisor on account of these acts of sexual harassment, the Organization necessarily acknowledged that they had occurred. Consequently, it cannot now dispute the merits of the complainant's accusations in this respect without completely contradicting itself and casting major doubts on whether its own decisions regarding its staff are taken in a responsible manner in such a sensitive area as that of discipline."
Keywords:
burden of proof; decision; disciplinary measure; harassment; lack of evidence; organisation's duties; reprimand; respect for dignity; sex discrimination; supervisor;
Judgment 420
45th Session, 1980
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 1 and 6
Extract:
In its Judgment No. 274, the Tribunal remitted the matter to the Director-General for reconsideration so that he might, if he thought fit, reprimand the complainant for having acted in such a manner as to lead to an interruption of the proceedings of the Council in committee. "The Tribunal would not have thought it right to dictate to the Director-General the exact form the reprimand should take, nor did the Tribunal in fact do so. The terms of the letter [...] do not exceed what is proper, and in particular do not amount to a censure as distinct from a reprimand."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 274
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; reprimand;
Consideration 4
Extract:
A sanction administered by the Director-General ought to be signed by him personally. In the present case a reprimand was signed by the Deputy Director-General, who as an interested party in the matter. "When [...] a reprimand is being administered by the Director-General himself and when [...] there is no exceptional urgency about its despatch, it is preferable that the document, which is to form part of the staff member's record, should bear the Director-General's signature. But the Tribunal does not consider that the form of signature invalidates the document."
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; formal flaw; formal requirements; reprimand;
Judgment 274
36th Session, 1976
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 21
Extract:
According to the organization, the memorandum in question signified the initiation of disciplinary proceedings. But the memorandum was written "in the language of conclusions and not of allegations; it is impossible to argue that the writer of a letter which says that if the misconduct is repeated the offender may be dismissed, retains an open mind about whether or not misconduct had occurred. [...] The language of this memorandum disqualifies the Director-General from administering either a censure or a reprimand."
Keywords:
censure; consequence; decision; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; discretion; reprimand;
Consideration 27
Extract:
The complainant was reprimanded on two occasions, the second being related to the first. "Since the Tribunal is setting aside the Director-General's conclusions about the earlier incident, it is clear that the second reprimand cannot in any event remain on the complainant's record in its existing form. The Tribunal considers therefore that the second reprimand should be set aside and that the matter should be remitted to the Director-General so that he can consider whether the [second] incident [...] is sufficiently grave to be by itself deserving of a reprimand."
Keywords:
conduct; disciplinary measure; freedom of association; reprimand; staff representative;
Consideration 2
Extract:
"But whereas in the case of censure which is of a disciplinary nature the Tribunal exercises full power of review as to the facts and the law because of the protection which staff members of the organization should enjoy, when the measure takes the form of a reprimand which is not of a disciplinary nature the Tribunal will exercise a limited power of review. That is to say, the Tribunal will not interfere unless [...]."
Keywords:
censure; difference; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; judicial review; reprimand; safeguard;
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant was reprimanded for her criticisms of two members of the Staff Council, of which she was herself a member. "The organization's case is simply that to cast doubt upon the integrity of another staff member is misconduct. In the opinion of the Tribunal this is too broad a proposition. [...] On a charge of misconduct motive and intent are relevant".
Keywords:
conduct; grounds; judicial review; reprimand; staff representative;
Judgment 111
17th Session, 1967
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Director General wrote to the complainant inviting him to give an explanation of behaviour which in his view could lead to a reprimand. The complainant submitted his explanations and the proposed sanction was applied. The complainant's contentions that "the aforesaid decision was taken in violation of his right to be heard and that the reasons for it were insufficient are therefore unfounded.
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; reprimand; right to reply;
|
|
|
|
|
