Retirement age (869,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Retirement age
Total judgments found: 18

• Judgment 4577

  
  135th Session, 2023
  World Tourism Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: Follow-up judgment for the determination of material damages and consequential orders.

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  One point of difference is whether the loss of future income should be assessed by reference to a retirement age from UNWTO of 62 years or 65 years. The latter is the normal age of retirement but, it appears from the material before the Tribunal, the complainant would have had the option of retiring at 62 years.

  Keywords:

  material damages; retirement age; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4576

  
  135th Session, 2023
  World Tourism Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: Follow-up judgment for the determination of material damages and consequential orders.

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  One point of difference is whether the loss of future income should be assessed by reference to a retirement age from UNWTO of 62 years or 65 years. The latter is the normal age of retirement but, it appears from the material before the Tribunal, the complainant would have had the option of retiring at 62 years.

  Keywords:

  material damages; retirement age; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4539

  
  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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4538

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 30 September 2018, being the date on which she reached her 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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4537

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 July 2018, being the date on which she reached her 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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4536

  
  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 the mandatory age of retirement of 62 according to the Staff Rules then in force.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• 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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4534

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant, a former staff member of UNAIDS, 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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4533

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 December 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of her appointment beyond retirement age.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4532

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 22 November 2018, after having reached the end of the extension period previously granted beyond the mandatory age of retirement of 62 according to the Staff Rules then in force.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; discrimination; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4531

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 August 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of her appointment beyond retirement age.

  Considerations 12-13

  Extract:

  [T]hese pleas fail to recognise the wide discretionary power acknowledged and accepted by the Tribunal vested in an executive head to make decisions to retain officials beyond the normal retirement age and the concomitant limits on review by the Tribunal (see, for example, Judgments 2669, consideration 8, and 4016, consideration 10). [...]
  Notwithstanding the preceding discussion about the width of the discretionary power of an executive head to extend an appointment and the limited scope of review by the Tribunal, such a decision can be challenged on the basis that the power has not been exercised bona fide or, described more generally, involved an abuse of authority.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2669, 4016
  

  Keywords:

  abuse of power; discretion; retirement age;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4528

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 December 2018, being the date on which she reached the mandatory age of retirement of 62 according to the Staff Rules then in force.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4527

  
  134th Session, 2022
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants impugn WHO’s decision to postpone implementation of the mandatory age of separation adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 70/244 of 23 December 2015.

  Consideration 14

  Extract:

  [T]he complainants simply continued in employment subject to then subsisting provisions concerning the age of retirement. They did not rely on a promise in doing this. Indeed, it is clear they hoped that by continuing in employment they would gain the benefit of an altered mandatory age of separation. While that hope was not realised, they did not act to their detriment because of any promise. The plea based on breach of a promise is unfounded.

  Keywords:

  promise; retirement age;
  

  Consideration 15

  Extract:

  [T]he Tribunal has recognised in Judgment 3071, considerations 12 and 13 (citing Judgment 2915), that differing ages of retirement referable to different pension entitlements are not inherently discriminatory.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2915, 3071
  

  Keywords:

  discrimination; retirement age;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; retirement age; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4370

  
  131st Session, 2021
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to retire him at the end of the month in which he reached the age of 62, even though he had not completed the five years of contributions required for the payment of a retirement pension by the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund.

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  [T]he Tribunal notes that, “[a]lthough the [executive head of an organisation] is empowered to extend a staff member’s appointment [beyond the mandatory retirement age], he is in no case bound to do so. He may exercise that authority to allow an exception only in the interests of [the service], not in the exclusive interests of the staff member. In deciding on the complainant’s case he [has] to bear in mind the possibility that the complainant might obtain a pension, but that [is] only one fact to be taken into account among others” (see Judgment 358). The Tribunal further clarified in Judgment 4037, consideration 11, that “an international organisation’s duty of care towards its officials does not compel it to extend an official’s appointment for the sole purpose of enabling her or him to draw a pension from the UNJSPF”. An organisation is therefore not required to depart from the Staff Regulations in the sole interest of the complainant.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 358, 4037
  

  Keywords:

  retirement age; unjspf;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  [I]nsofar as the impugned decision merely applies the normal rule of mandatory retirement for staff members who have reached the age limit, it cannot be considered that such a decision involves a misuse of authority or that it constitutes a measure which discriminates against the complainant.

  Keywords:

  abuse of power; discrimination; misuse of authority; retirement age;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; retirement age;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4254

  
  129th Session, 2020
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his appointment beyond the statutory retirement age.

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  As the Tribunal has consistently held, a decision to retain an official beyond the normal retirement age is an exceptional measure over which the executive head of an organisation exercises wide discretion. Such a decision is therefore subject to only limited review by the Tribunal, which will interfere only if the decision was taken without authority, if a rule of form or procedure was breached, if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law, if an essential fact was overlooked, if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the facts, or if there was abuse of authority (see, for example, Judgments 1143, consideration 3, 2845, consideration 5, 3285, consideration 10, 3765, consideration 2, or 3884, consideration 2).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1143, 2845, 3285, 3765, 3884
  

  Keywords:

  age limit; discretion; retirement age;
  

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  The complainant asks the Tribunal to order the “extension of [his] contract retroactively from the date on which [he] left the International Labour Office [...] on 31 January 2016 up to the age of 65 years with the same status that [he] had before leaving the Office”. However, that period having expired by the date of this judgment, the Tribunal cannot, in any event, order that the complainant be reinstated as he requests.

  Keywords:

  reinstatement; retirement age;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  age limit; complaint allowed; decision quashed; retirement; retirement age;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3133

  
  113th Session, 2012
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; post classification; retirement age;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3122

  
  113th Session, 2012
  World Trade Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; failure to exhaust internal remedies; retirement age;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3108

  
  113th Session, 2012
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 13

  Extract:

  Having submitted his application in good faith, the complainant was entitled to have it considered on its merits and in a timely manner. While it cannot be said that the complainant's contract would have been extended, the Agency's lack of diligence in its consideration of its application effectively foreclosed any possibility to have his contract extended. In these circumstances, he is not entitled to an award of the salary and benefits which he would have received if his contract had been extended as he has claimed. However, he is entitled to moral damages for the flaws identified.

  Keywords:

  delay in internal procedure; material damages; moral injury; retirement age;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; retirement age;