Disclosure of evidence (151,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Disclosure of evidence
Total judgments found: 185
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
Judgment 2097
92nd Session, 2002
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 22-23
Extract:
[T]he complainants have asked the Tribunal to order WHO to produce a vast array of documents relating to its hiring practices generally in an apparent attempt to demonstrate that the Organization has acted illegally or unfairly in other cases. [...]
The Tribunal will not countenance this type of "fishing expedition". It can only deal with complaints filed in accordance with its Statute and the Rules, and the materials presently before it are fully adequate to allow it to dispose of the present case; it will not embark on a general inquiry extending beyond the complaint actually before it.
Keywords:
disclosure of evidence; fishing expedition;
Judgment 2062
91st Session, 2001
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal's practice is to consider any items that are material to the case".
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; evidence; practice; submissions; tribunal;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not use [the confidential documents submitted by the organisation] to the complainant's detriment unless he has had the opportunity to see them beforehand".
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; complainant; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; evidence; right to reply; submissions; tribunal;
Judgment 2028
90th Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Tribunal does not dispute the principle of delegation of authority (see Judgment 1386 [...]); however, when a complainant calls for proof that power has in fact been delegated to a specific person, it is a matter for the organisation to produce such proof."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1386
Keywords:
burden of proof; complainant; delegated authority; disclosure of evidence; evidence; general principle; organisation's duties; request by a party;
Judgment 2014
90th Session, 2001
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17(D)
Extract:
The complainant argues that his dismissal was based on unsubstantiated accusations and evidence that was not made available to him. "It is true that confidential information given to the auditors was not made known to him, the Joint Disciplinary Committee or the Joint Appeals Board. This puts that evidence in the realm of unsubstantiated hearsay which should not have been relied on. It is contrary to due process to require an accused staff member to answer unsubstantiated allegations made by unknown persons. The staff member is entitled to confront his or her accusers. In the present case, if the organization was not willing to disclose the identity of the complainant's accusers, and had no other independent evidence to rely on, the charges should not have been brought."
Keywords:
admissibility of evidence; adversarial proceedings; communication to third party; confidential evidence; disciplinary procedure; disclosure of evidence; due process; due process in disciplinary procedure; duty to inform; evidence; witness;
Judgment 1784
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"Under Manual paragraph I.2.510 the Organization is empowered to require that the original bills be attached to the form that the staff member must fill up to claim the education grant. It does not have to accept evidence of the sort the complainant is offering. It will evaluate any alternative proof he may produce in the absence of the bills. Original documents must have gone astray before, and it is often possible to reconstitute them. It is up to the Organization to decide - subject to review by the Tribunal - whether the proof offered is satisfactory."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PARAGRAPH I.2.510 OF WHO MANUAL
Keywords:
admissibility of evidence; allowance; application for execution; appraisal of evidence; burden of proof; complainant; disclosure of evidence; discretion; education expenses; evidence; judicial review; lack of evidence;
Judgment 1781
85th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant submitted that the Director-General had verbally promised him three step increments at his grade. On the evidence there is no denial by the Director-General on that point. The Tribunal holds that: "While the Director-General may communicate within the Organization through others acting on his behalf, the best evidence available must be offered in proceedings before the Tribunal. In this instance it would have been direct denial by the Director-General himself."
Keywords:
disclosure of evidence; evidence; executive head; lack of evidence; promise;
Judgment 1659
83rd Session, 1997
European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"The defendant strongly objects to the complainants' producing privileged documents which it says they should never have disclosed without leave from the Secretary-General and which should therefore be discounted. The complainants explain that when still on the staff they were regularly sent such documents. So it is hard to see what is wrong with their relying thereon in pleadings that are confidential anyway."
Keywords:
acceptance; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; evidence; executive head; iloat; submissions;
Judgment 1637
83rd Session, 1997
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant came by and produced the minutes of a meeting of the Advisory Board on Compensation Claims even though the document was privileged. "The Organization objects and in its reply asks the Tribunal to disregard [the minutes]. Yet the [document] forms part of the case records, the complainant did not obtain it by deceit, its authenticity is not in dispute, and in citing it the Organization seeks to belittle its importance. There are no grounds for striking out a text that is material to the case and that in any event the Tribunal might have ordered the defendant to disclose."
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; evidence; submissions;
Judgment 1564
82nd Session, 1997
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The firm case law has it that the Tribunal will not interfere with the comparison of entrants in a competition. Only when it appears that the choice of candidate may rest on some mistake of fact or law or there may have been misuse of authority will the Tribunal order the production of evidence so that it may review such comparison and will the complainant be entitled to see such evidence. In the instant case the review of the selection procedure reveals neither a breach of the Organization's Staff Regulations or other rules, nor any mistake of fact or law, nor misuse of authority."
Keywords:
abuse of power; candidate; case law; competition; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; discretion; due process; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; misuse of authority; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1560
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The complainant asks the Organization to say how often it has stopped a competition in order to change the duties of the vacant post and regrade it. There is no need for evidence on that score since the issue is not decisive: if the procedure is lawful it is immaterial how often UNESCO may have followed it before".
Keywords:
competition; competition cancelled; disclosure of evidence; evidence; post; post classification; submissions;
Judgment 1513
81st Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As a general rule a complainant may not be entitled to consult any records that may have been made of discussions by a selection committee: members of such committees would not feel free to discuss candidates independently in future if they felt at risk of having there own views divulged: see Judgment 556."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 556
Keywords:
case law; competition; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; report; request by a party; selection board;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The privilege that protects the Selection Committee's actual deliberations "must cover also interviews held in preparation for its meeting."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 556
Keywords:
competition; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; report; selection board;
Judgment 1406
78th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant wants the Tribunal to hold hearings and call witnesses "if it needs proof of any facts. Since the WHO has produced further evidence, there is no need for such hearings. Moreover, the disclosure of that evidence satisfies the Tribunal that there has been due process."
Keywords:
actuary; adversarial proceedings; disclosure of evidence; due process; oral proceedings;
Judgment 1372
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"As the Tribunal held in Judgments 1177 [...], under 5, and 1323 [...], under 9, an item that forms part of the proceedings that led to the impugned decision may not be withheld from scrutiny by the Tribunal. That holds good for any appellate body. So the administration ought to have disclosed to the Regional Board the documents it required to enable it to take up the complainant's appeal properly."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1177, 1323
Keywords:
case law; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; moral injury; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1188
73rd Session, 1992
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
After the Director-General imposed a disciplinary sanction on the complainant he lodged an internal appeal. Rule 110.4.3 of the Staff Rules says that "the deliberations and reports of the Disciplinary Committee and its recommendations to the Director- General shall be confidential". The material issue is "whether the full text of the Disciplinary Committee's report, and not just the text of its recommendation, was disclosed to the Joint Appeals Committee. If it was, the Union should have let the complainant too have a copy and, failing that, there was a procedural flaw in that there was breach of his right of defence."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UPU STAFF RULE 110.4.3
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; disclosure of evidence; further submissions; interlocutory order; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; recommendation; report; right to reply; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"An item that formed part of the internal appeal proceedings should be at the Tribunal's disposal since it cannot otherwise appraise the background to the impugned decision and determine whether it shows any flaw. Further submissions are therefore required to complete the case records."
Keywords:
decision; disclosure of evidence; flaw; further submissions; interlocutory order; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedure before the tribunal; recommendation; report;
Judgment 1177
73rd Session, 1992
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The defendant organisation has refused to produce certain documents pleading privilege. "An item that forms part of the decision may not be withheld from the Tribunal's scrutiny. [...] There shall therefore be further submissions to complete the case records, the Union being required to supply the [material documents]."
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; further submissions; interlocutory order; judicial review; refusal;
Judgment 1176
73rd Session, 1992
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
The Tribunal will discount "a new material fact" which the organisation supplied "too late for the complainant to be able to comment".
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; disclosure of evidence; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; right to reply; time limit;
Judgment 1127
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"There is no requirement in the Rules that [the report of an advisory body] should be communicated to the official before the Director General takes his decision. In any event the complainant has had the opportunity of addressing the contents of the report in her pleadings to the Tribunal."
Keywords:
advisory body; advisory opinion; disclosure of evidence; lack of injury; report; right to reply; tribunal;
Judgment 1116
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant submits that the decision not to renew his appointment was tainted with breach of his right of defence since he failed to get a copy of a report concerning him by the Joint Disciplinary Committee. The Tribunal observes that such reports are confidential under Rule 110.2(e). "Besides, the report is immaterial, even in the present context, because the Committee recommended no disciplinary action and the stated reasons for termination were financial stringency and abolition of post."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 110.2(E)
Keywords:
abolition of post; advisory body; budgetary reasons; confidential evidence; contract; disclosure of evidence; fixed-term; lack of injury; non-renewal of contract; report; right to reply;
Judgment 1115
71st Session, 1991
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Organization objects to [the] production [of certain items of evidence] on the grounds of privilege but not to the Tribunal's seeing the documents and ruling on the plea of privilege. The complainant being in agreement with that course of action, the Tribunal has ordered the Organization to disclose to it the notes and correspondence. Having read the documents disclosed, the Tribunal upholds the plea of privilege."
Keywords:
appraisal of evidence; complainant; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; request by a party; tribunal;
Judgment 1070
70th Session, 1991
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant was dismissed under ITU Staff Rule 10.1.1a) for having claimed and accepting reimbursement for treatment whose costs had already been met by other schemes. He alleges denial of his right to a hearing and his right to see the case records. "The Tribunal is satisfied that he had ample opportunity to find out exactly what the serious charges against him were and to state his case at each point in the proceedings."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ITU STAFF RULE 10.1.1A)
Keywords:
conduct; disclosure of evidence; right to reply; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
|
