|
|
|
|
Internal procedure (668,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Internal procedure
Total judgments found: 38
1, 2 | next >
Judgment 4886
138th Session, 2024
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the deferral of his application for clearance to carry a service weapon.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant requests that UNESCO be ordered to pay him damages for the excessive delay in the internal appeal procedure. As an exception to what has just been stated, this claim must be examined because international civil servants are, as a matter of principle, entitled to expect that their case will be dealt with by the internal appeal bodies within a reasonable time (see, for example, Judgments 3510, consideration 24, or 2116, consideration 11). A failure to comply with this need for expeditious proceedings, where wrongful, warrants compensation, the amount of which, under the Tribunal’s case law, ordinarily depends on two essential considerations, namely the length of the delay and the effect of the delay on the employee concerned (see, for example, Judgments 4178, consideration 15, 4100, consideration 7, or 3160, consideration 17). In this case, the delay of nearly four years between the submission of the first internal appeal to the Appeals Board on 3 April 2018 and the adoption of the final decision of 14 March 2022 is, in absolute terms, clearly excessive. However, firstly, the Tribunal notes that the complainant, who asked the Appeals Board three times to extend the time limit for filing his submissions, for a total period of nine months, himself caused some of the delay in the procedure, and, moreover, it may seem reasonable, in view of the extensions obtained by the complainant, that they were also granted to the Organization. Moreover, the Organization explains, convincingly in the Tribunal’s view, that the functioning of the Appeals Board was considerably disrupted, in 2020 and 2021, by the successive lockdowns ordered by the French authorities owing to the Covid-19 pandemic, which, in particular, affected the Board’s capacity to hold its hearings as usual. Lastly, it must be pointed out that, given the abandonment of the process of arming security officers following the delivery of the IOS report of October 2018, the complainant’s internal appeals had become moot shortly after their filing, with the result that the procedural delay was not liable to cause him substantial moral injury (see, in this connection, Judgments 4727, consideration 14, and 4635, consideration 8). This being so, the Tribunal considers that, in the particular circumstances of the case, there is no reason to order UNESCO to pay compensation to the complainant under that head.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2116, 3160, 3510, 4100, 4178, 4635, 4727
Keywords:
burden of proof; delay; internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4842
138th Session, 2024
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the application to her salary of the new salary scale for 2018.
Consideration 2
Extract:
With regard, firstly, to the failure to comply with various time limits during the internal appeals procedure, [...] the Tribunal, while regretting that the Organization does not adhere more closely to the time limits that it has itself established, notes that time limits of this kind are not intended to have the effect of nullifying a decision taken after their expiry. It follows that their non-observance does nottherefore render such decisions unlawful and, where that non-observance is wrongful, it may only entitle the staff member concerned to compensation if it causes actual injury to her or him, which it therefore falls to the staff member concerned to establish (see Judgment 4584, consideration 4). Moreover, the Tribunal has also stated that if the failure of appeal bodies to examine appeals within a reasonable time constitutes a failure to comply with the requirement that internal appeals be processed expeditiously and, consequently, a failing on the part of the organization concerned, nonetheless, the amount of compensation liable to be granted under this head ordinarily depends on two essential considerations, namely the length of the delay and the effect of the delay on the employee concerned (see, for example, Judgments 4727, consideration 14, 4635, consideration 8, 4178, consideration 15, and 4100, consideration 7).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4100, 4178, 4584, 4635, 4727
Keywords:
delay; delay in internal procedure; internal procedure; time limit;
Judgment 4837
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who separated from service, contests the placement in his personnel file of a letter stating that he was found to have committed sexual harassment during his employment and that, had he not separated from service, he would have been imposed the disciplinary measure of a final letter of warning.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[The complainant is] (relying on consideration 15 of Judgment 2786) to the effect that it was not open to the Federation to justify a decision by conducting further enquiries after the internal appeal proceedings have been concluded since it breached the right to be heard and renders the appeal proceedings futile […] [T]he Tribunal’s statement in consideration 15 of Judgment 2786 is not applicable to the case at hand since, contrary to the facts underlying Judgment 2786, the scope of the investigation of the present case did not change.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2786
Keywords:
internal procedure; investigation;
Consideration 21
Extract:
As a result of the procedural flaw in the Appeals Commission’s process, the Tribunal will remit the matter to the Federation for a new consideration of the complainant’s internal appeal by a newly composed Appeals Commission.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; internal appeal; internal procedure;
Considerations 18-21
Extract:
[T]he complainant submits, in substance, that the Appeals Commission prevented him from attending the hearing of the witnesses it called to permit him to test the evidence, and, in any event, that he was not even provided with the statements of such witnesses […] The Federation relies on Judgment 4408, where the Tribunal concluded, in consideration 4, that an interview conducted as an “investigative measure” to enable an appeal body to obtain general information not relating specifically to the situation of the complainant was not a hearing where the complainant was required to be present or where the content of the discussion had to be disclosed to him or her […] It is obvious from the content of the Appeals Commission report that the information sought by the Commission was not of a general nature and that it was relating specifically to the investigation and disciplinary procedure at issue. In these circumstances, the Tribunal considers that the complainant had a right, at least to have been apprised of the content of the interviews and to provide his comments if he so wished. Since this was not done, the complainant’s right to be heard was violated […] For this, which is an infringement of due process, he will be awarded 15,000 Swiss francs.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4408
Keywords:
due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal procedure; moral damages; oral proceedings; right to be heard; witness;
Judgment 4836
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges his non-selection for several positions.
Considerations 13-17
Extract:
[T]he complainant submits, in substance, that the Appeals Commission prevented him from attending the hearing of the witnesses it called to permit him to test the evidence, and, in any event, that he was not even provided with the statements of such witnesses […] The Federation relies on Judgment 4408, where the Tribunal concluded, in consideration 4, that an interview conducted as an “investigative measure” to enable an appeal body to obtain general information not relating specifically to the situation of the complainant was not a hearing where the complainant was required to be present or where the content of the discussion had to be disclosed to him or her […] It is obvious from the content of the Appeals Commission report that the information sought by the Commission was not of a general nature and that it was relating specifically to the selection procedures at issue. In these circumstances, the Tribunal considers that the complainant had a right, at least to have been apprised of the content of the interviews and to provide his comments if he so wished. Since this was not done, the complainant’s right to be heard was violated […] For this, which is an infringement of due process, he will be awarded 15,000 Swiss francs.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4408
Keywords:
due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal procedure; moral damages; oral proceedings; right to be heard; witness;
Judgment 4835
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to rescind an offer of employment that had been extended to him, on the basis that he had been disciplined for sexual misconduct.
Considerations 4-6
Extract:
[T]he complainant submits, in substance, that the Appeals Commission prevented him from attending the hearing of the witnesses it called to permit him to test the evidence, and, in any event, that he was not even provided with the statements of such witnesses […] The Federation relies on Judgment 4408, where the Tribunal concluded, in consideration 4, that an interview conducted as an “investigative measure” to enable an appeal body to obtain general information not relating specifically to the situation of the complainant was not a hearing where the complainant was required to be present or where the content of the discussion had to be disclosed to him or her […] It is obvious […] that the Commission interviewed these Federation staff on various issues which touched and concerned “the circumstances in which the offer was rescinded”. This tends to demonstrate that the information sought by the Commission was not of a general nature, and that it was relating specifically to the rescission of the offer of employment at issue. In these circumstances, the Tribunal considers that the complainant had a right, at least to have been apprised of the content of the interviews and to provide his comments if he so wished. Since this was not done, the complainant’s right to be heard was violated […] For this, which is an infringement of due process, he will be awarded 15,000 Swiss francs.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4408
Keywords:
due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal procedure; moral damages; oral proceedings; right to be heard; witness;
Judgment 4834
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the non-extension of his fixed-term appointment.
Considerations 12-15
Extract:
[T]he complainant submits, in substance, that the Appeals Commission prevented him from attending the hearing of the witnesses it called to permit him to test the evidence, and, in any event, that he was not even provided with the statements of such witnesses […] The Federation relies on Judgment 4408, where the Tribunal concluded, in consideration 4, that an interview conducted as an “investigative measure” to enable an appeal body to obtain general information not relating specifically to the situation of the complainant was not a hearing where the complainant was required to be present or where the content of the discussion had to be disclosed to him or her […] While the Appeals Commission’s report is almost silent about the content of those interviews, its statement that “[…]” tends to demonstrate that the interviews were not about the Federation’s budgetary framework but about the specific situation of the complainant and the decision not to extend his contract. In these circumstances, the Tribunal considers that the complainant had a right, at least to have been apprised of the content of the interviews and to provide his comments if he so wished. Since this was not done, the complainant’s right to be heard was violated […] For this, which is an infringement of due process, he will be awarded 15,000 Swiss francs.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4408
Keywords:
due process; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal procedure; moral damages; oral proceedings; right to be heard; witness;
Judgment 4780
137th Session, 2024
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the monthly amount deducted from her pension as contribution to her after-service health insurance in the period from May 2001 to December 2019.
Consideration 8
Extract:
As the complainant did not address a request for reconsideration of the initial decision […], in accordance with Staff Rule 11.1.2, she has not exhausted internal remedies. Her complaint is therefore irreceivable, according to Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Tribunal’s Statute, and must be dismissed.
Keywords:
internal procedure; internal remedies not exhausted; review of administrative decision;
Judgment 4775
137th Session, 2024
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to “terminate [her] contract after [her] resignation”.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to exhaust internal remedies; former official; internal appeal; internal procedure; internal remedies not exhausted;
Consideration 8
Extract:
FAO Manual paragraph 331.4, entitled ‘Appeals by Former Staff Members’, provides that former staff members shall have access to the appeals procedure. FAO Manual paragraph 331.4.1 specifically states that “[f]ormer staff members [...] may lodge an appeal in accordance with the provisions of this Manual Section subject to Manual [paragraphs] 331.4.2 and 331.4.3”.
Keywords:
failure to exhaust internal remedies; former official; internal appeal; internal procedure; internal remedies not exhausted;
Judgment 4760
137th Session, 2024
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the failure to establish a medical board to examine the percentage of her permanent loss of function.
Consideration 2
Extract:
Under the Tribunal’s settled case law, the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 3, must be read in the light of paragraph 1 of that Article and are not applicable where the official concerned can use internal remedies, in which case these must be exhausted, as required under paragraph 1, before a complaint may be filed with the Tribunal (see Judgments 4517, consideration 4, and 2631, considerations 3 to 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2631, 4517
Keywords:
failure to exhaust internal remedies; internal procedure; internal remedies not exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 4664
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the classification of her post.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that the recognition that there was an unreasonable delay does not in itself render the decision taken at the end of the procedure unlawful (see, for example, Judgments 4584, consideration 4, 4408, considerations 5 and 6, or 2885, consideration 14). As regards the injury that may have been caused to the staff member by that delay, the Tribunal takes into account two considerations, namely the length of the delay and the effect of the delay on the staff member concerned (see, for example, Judgments 4493, consideration 6, 4229, consideration 5, and 4031, consideration 8).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2885, 4031, 4229, 4408, 4493, 4584
Keywords:
internal procedure; time limit;
Judgment 4541
134th Session, 2022
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to notify her of the outcome of the investigation into her internal complaint of moral harassment, the decision not to send her the full report drawn up following that investigation, and the decision not to inform her of the outcome of her internal complaint.
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Tribunal [...] notes that the redacted investigation report was not sent to the complainant until after the JAB had made a recommendation to that effect in its report [...]. [...] In those circumstances, [...] the fact that the complainant did not receive the investigation report until she was informed of the President’s final decision resulted in her being deprived of the opportunity to challenge the findings of the investigation effectively during the appeal proceedings before the JAB. [T]he Tribunal must conclude that the procedure followed before the JAB was also unlawful in that the JAB was not provided with all the evidence which would have enabled it to give a fully informed decision on the internal appeal before it (see, to that effect, Judgment 1372, consideration 11). In consequence, the complainant was deprived of the right to have her internal appeal properly examined (on the obligation of any international organisation to ensure that the rules are correctly applied and due process followed, see, inter alia, Judgments 2219, 2654, 2700 and 3065).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1372, 2219, 2654, 2700, 3065
Keywords:
disclosure of evidence; harassment; inquiry; internal procedure; report;
Judgment 4535
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate him from service on 31 October 2018, being the date on which he reached his retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of his appointment beyond retirement age.
Consideration 11
Extract:
Generally, the process of review creates an opportunity for an Administration to reconsider an administrative decision earlier made and the correctness of that decision. It can, in this process, make a decision rectifying or remedying any deficiencies in that earlier decision. That is what happened in the present case. Thus, the failure of the Director-General to initially consider the extension request himself, was remedied by him doing so in the administrative review. An aspect of this is reflected in the Tribunal’s case law, which decides that the mere fact that a decision was initially flawed but was later corrected does not suffice to warrant awarding damages for moral injury (see Judgment 4156, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4156
Keywords:
internal procedure; moral damages;
Judgment 4510
134th Session, 2022
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to put her on unpaid absence under contract.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; internal procedure; unpaid leave;
Judgment 4464
133rd Session, 2022
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the WTO’s refusal to recognise the illness from which he states he suffers as service-incurred.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[T]here is no reason to set aside the board’s report, which is merely a preparatory step that does not in itself cause injury (see, for example, Judgment 4118, consideration 2).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4118
Keywords:
internal procedure; step in the procedure;
Judgment 4435
132nd Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who is a former permanent employee of the European Patent Office, challenges the deductions from his remuneration that were made in respect of his absences for strike participation as well as the lawfulness of the general normative decisions on which those deductions were based.
Consideration 18
Extract:
A further issue raised by the complainant concerns the procedures adopted in the internal appeal proceedings. He argues that when he filed his appeals the governing procedural rules conferred a right to an oral hearing if requested. When the time came for the hearing, the procedural rules, so he argues, had been altered and deprived him of this right and the Appeals Committee acted as if this was so. These circumstances found a claim by the complainant for moral damages. But even if the complainant’s analysis is correct, having regard to the subject matter of the internal appeals and the issues they raised (almost entirely legal), it is difficult to see what prejudice the complainant suffered by being restricted to written submissions. Put slightly differently, a complainant must establish the foundation for the award of moral damages (see Judgments 4231, consideration 15, and 4147, consideration 13). As the complainant has singularly failed to do so in this case, his claim for moral damages on this basis will be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4147, 4231
Keywords:
internal procedure; moral injury; oral proceedings;
Judgment 4399
131st Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to transfer him from a manager position to a non-managerial post.
Consideration 13
Extract:
[The complainant's] claim for costs in the internal appeal proceedings will be rejected as there are no exceptional circumstances to justify such an award (see Judgment 4217, consideration 12).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4217
Keywords:
costs; costs for internal appeal procedure; internal procedure;
Judgment 4231
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term appointment and to place him on special leave with pay until his contract expired.
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant’s further plea that his right to due process was breached because the Appeals Committee did not hold a hearing in which witnesses were called also fails. According to Staff Rule 331.3.62, it is within the discretion of the Appeals Committee to determine whether hearings are necessary so it was under no obligation to call the witnesses whom the complainant wished it to hear (see, for example, Judgment 3846, consideration 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3846
Keywords:
due process; internal procedure; oral proceedings;
Judgment 4228
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reject his request for compensation for loss of earnings allegedly caused by a service-incurred injury.
Consideration 6
Extract:
According to that provision [Manual paragraph 342.6.522], the ACCC is not required to hold hearings, and as the case at hand regarded only a question of law, the Tribunal finds no flaw in the ACCC’s determination that hearings were unnecessary.
Keywords:
internal procedure; oral proceedings;
Judgment 4220
129th Session, 2020
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the rejection of their requests for an agreed separation.
Consideration 15
Extract:
[T]he requests for costs for the internal appeals are unfounded. There is no provision which allows for an award of legal costs for the internal appeal proceedings and there are no exceptional circumstances in these cases which could justify such an award.
Keywords:
costs; costs for internal appeal procedure; internal procedure;
Judgment 4217
129th Session, 2020
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to provide her with the record of the investigation that ensued after she filed a harassment complaint against her supervisor, and the fact that she received no compensation for the moral harassment that she claims to have suffered.
Consideration 12
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal considers that there are no grounds for awarding costs in respect of the internal appeal proceedings. Such costs may only be awarded under exceptional circumstances, which do not exist in the present case.
Keywords:
costs; costs for internal appeal procedure; internal procedure;
1, 2 | next >
|
|
|
|
|