Renewal of contrat (718,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Renewal of contrat
Total judgments found: 10

• Judgment 4849

  
  138th Session, 2024
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to convert his fixed-term appointment into a continuing or permanent appointment.

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  The second contention is based on a premise that there was a practice that a staff member on a fixed-term contract would, at the end of their fifth year of appointment, be offered the choice of having their contract converted into a continuing appointment at that point, or wait a further two years before having their contract converted into a permanent appointment. The complainant contends his treatment did not accord with this practice and involved unequal treatment. But again, in the main, the complainant supports the existence of this practice, and its breach, by generalised assertions, though he does descend into some specifics. However, the Tribunal’s case law requires that “allegations of discrimination and unequal treatment can lead to redress on condition that they are based on precise and proven facts” (see, for example, Judgment 4238, consideration 5). The concept of “precise and proven facts” entails sufficiently detailed and persuasive evidence to establish that there had been unequal treatment.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4238
  

  Keywords:

  burden of proof; duration of appointment; evidence; extension of contract; permanent appointment; practice; renewal of contrat; unequal treatment;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; permanent appointment; renewal of contrat; staff member's interest;
  

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  The Organization is correct in taking the position that there was no right to have a fixed-term appointment as a WIPO staff member converted to either a continuing or permanent appointment. Staff Regulation 4.17, which concerns the grant of a fixed-term appointment, provides in paragraph (f) that: “A fixed term appointment does not carry any expectancy, legal or otherwise, of renewal or conversion, irrespective of the length of service.” This is fortified by the provisions of paragraph (b) of Staff Regulation 4.18, which provides that a continuing appointment “shall be granted at the discretion of the Director General”. Paragraph (b) of Staff Regulation 4.19 is to the same effect in relation to permanent appointments. The following comments of the Tribunal in Judgment 4008, consideration 11, are apt to apply in the present case:
  “There is plainly nothing in these provisions which would entitle the complainant to have her fixed-term contract redefined. Nor is there anything in the Tribunal’s case law establishing such a right. The complainant is therefore wrong to submit that her fixed-term contract should have been redefined [...]”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4008
  

  Keywords:

  discretion; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; permanent appointment; renewal of contrat;
  

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  Cases can arise where an inference can be drawn that an alleged practice does exist, largely because of the refusal or failure of the organisation to provide documents requested by a complainant intended to prove the existence of that practice. One example, relied on by the complainant, was Judgment 3415, particularly considerations 6 to 9. In the present case, the complainant recounts his unsuccessful attempts to obtain, during the processes internal to the organisation, documentation intended to prove the existence of the practice. However, what he has failed to do in these proceedings before the Tribunal is exercise, if necessary, his ability under the Tribunal’s Rules, specifically under Article 9, paragraph 6, to secure documents from WIPO which would prove, in an evidentiary sense, the existence of the practice he asserts. The inference drawn in Judgment 3415 was substantially based on the refusal of the defendant organisation to produce the discovery documents requested by the complaint in the proceedings before the Tribunal. In that matter, the Tribunal made it clear that the defendant organisation should have, in the face of the discovery request, produced the documents. In the present case, the absence of a request or, ultimately if necessary, procuring an order under Article 9, paragraph 6, militates against drawing an inference that the asserted practice existed.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3415
  

  Keywords:

  burden of proof; disclosure of evidence; evidence; extension of contract; permanent appointment; practice; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4848

  
  138th Session, 2024
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests WIPO’s decisions (i) to advertise his post; (ii) to organise a selection process to fill his post; (iii) not to appoint him to the post without competition; (iv) to renew his fixed-term appointment for three months only; (v) to restructure his division; and (vi) to modify/redefine his post.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint dismissed; difference; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; organisation's duties; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; staff member's interest; title of post;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  The Tribunal is satisfied that there is no manifest error in the Appeal Board’s finding and conclusion that there was a material difference between the duties and responsibilities of the newly created position (Director of CMD) and those of the original position (Director of CID) as a result of the redefined organizational context, warranting advertising for the post of Director of CMD. Therefore, the Director General’s decision to extend the complainant’s contract by three months only in the soon to be abolished position of Director of CID was taken in proper exercise of his discretion.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; difference; discretion; duration of appointment; extension of contract; manifest error; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; title of post;
  

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  The other and related decisions apparent from the letter of 31 January 2018 were the decisions to offer the complainant a three-month extension of his fixed-term appointment and to advertise the position of Director of the (about to be created) CMD. In his pleas, the complainant challenges the creation of this position contending, amongst other things, it was not materially different to the position he then formally occupied and was the product of a reorganisation which was illusory rather than substantial. It is unnecessary to repeat the various ways this is put by the complainant. However, mention should be made of a submission, which is tantamount to an allegation that the reorganisation was not a bona fide exercise of an undoubtedly wide discretionary power the executive head of an international organisation has to institute administrative and other structural changes within the organisation with consequential effects on existing posts, including their redefinition or abolition (see, for example, Judgments 4599, considerations 11 and 12, 4353, consideration 7, 3238, consideration 7, and 3169, consideration 7). This is, in substance, an allegation of bad faith. However, bad faith may not be presumed, and the burden of proof is on the party that pleads it (see Judgments 4682, consideration 3, 4353, consideration 12, and 2800, consideration 21). In the present case, there is not a scintilla of evidence that the reorganisation decision did not involve a bona fide exercise of the wide discretionary power of the executive head. This plea is unfounded.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2800, 3169, 3238, 4353, 4599, 4682
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; bad faith; burden of proof; difference; discretion; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; title of post;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4346

  
  131st Session, 2021
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment beyond its expiry date.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; fixed-term; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4009

  
  126th Session, 2018
  Energy Charter Conference
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term contract following the abolition of his post, but to give him a Project Staff contract.

  Consideration 15

  Extract:

  The complainant [...] submits that his employment relationship after 1 July 2016 could not be termed a Project Staff contract because his duties, which remained the same, could not be subsumed under the notion of a project, nor could they be viewed as short-term.
  The Tribunal notes that according to the terms of the letter of 4 December 2015, the Secretary General offered the complainant a six-month Project Staff contract, with “the same job description” and at the same grade and step. In other words, the complainant continued to perform the same duties with the same remuneration. The only differences between the contract under which he was employed and that which was offered to him, were their name and duration. As the complainant had been employed since 1998 as Head of Administration and Finance under a fixed-term contract, the Secretary General could not offer him a temporary contract to continue performing exactly the same work as he was performing under a fixed-term contract without contravening the spirit of the applicable texts (see Judgment 2708, under 10).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2708
  

  Keywords:

  continuance of operations; duration of appointment; fixed-term; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4008

  
  126th Session, 2018
  Energy Charter Conference
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: In her first complaint, the complainant challenges the decision not to extend her fixed-term contract following the abolition of her post, but to give her a Project Staff contract. In her second complaint, she challenges three vacancy notices concerning C category posts and in her third complaint, she challenges the rejection of her application for two of these posts.

  Consideration 15

  Extract:

  The complainant [...] submits that her employment relationship after 1 January 2016 could not be termed a Project Staff contract because her duties, which remained the same, could not be subsumed under the notion of a project, nor could they be viewed as short-term.
  The Tribunal notes that according to the terms of the letter of 4 December 2015, the Secretary General offered the complainant a one-year Project Staff contract, with “the same job description” and at the same grade and step. In other words, the complainant continued to perform the same duties with the same remuneration. The only differences between the contract under which she was employed and that which was offered to her, were their name and duration. As the complainant had been employed since 1996 as Administrative Assistant under a fixed-term contract, the Secretary General could not offer her a temporary contract to continue performing exactly the same work as she was performing under a fixed-term contract without contravening the spirit of the applicable texts (see Judgment 2708, under 10).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2708
  

  Keywords:

  continuance of operations; duration of appointment; fixed-term; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3838

  
  124th Session, 2017
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment.

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  Although, having regard to all the circumstances, the complainant could have little hope of his appointment being renewed, it cannot be said that his chances of obtaining a renewal were nil.

  Keywords:

  loss of opportunity; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment .08

  
  Sessions of the Administrative Tribunal of the League of Nations, 1946
  League of Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  budgetary reasons; interpretation; local status; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment .07

  
  Sessions of the Administrative Tribunal of the League of Nations, 1946
  League of Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  budgetary reasons; interpretation; local status; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment .06

  
  Sessions of the Administrative Tribunal of the League of Nations, 1946
  League of Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  budgetary reasons; interpretation; local status; renewal of contrat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment .05

  
  Sessions of the Administrative Tribunal of the League of Nations, 1946
  League of Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  budgetary reasons; interpretation; local status; renewal of contrat;