Organisation's duties (202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 645,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Organisation's duties
Total judgments found: 652
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >
Judgment 2017
90th Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"An organisation must interpret the statements of a staff member in good faith and [...] as part of its duty to spare the staff member unnecessary injury, it may also be called upon to provide procedural guidance and help to put right a mistake (see Judgment 1734, [...] under 3(g))."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1734
Keywords:
good faith; injury; interpretation; organisation's duties; request by a party; staff member's interest; statement of intent;
Judgment 2014
90th Session, 2001
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"The Tribunal considers that either there was sufficient admissible evidence of the guilt of the complainant as an accused staff member or there was not. If there was not enough admissible evidence to convince the person making a decision, the charge should have been dismissed; if there was enough such evidence, then there should have been a finding of guilty. What is not permissible is to take a stand somewhere between the two, which is what the [Joint Appeals] Board did."
Keywords:
admissibility of evidence; appraisal of evidence; due process; evidence; lack of evidence; organisation's duties; presumption of innocence; staff member's interest;
Judgment 2003
90th Session, 2001
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainants did not challenge the initial decisions denying them an installation grant and therefore "those decisions became final and the complainants were barred from challenging them by filling up application forms years later and claiming the quashing of the decisions refusing them by implication the allowance for which their assignment to Maastricht made them eligible. The Joint Committee for Disputes was right to cite the principle of legal certainty which must govern relations between an organisation and its staff' and to note that it was not possible to [exempt] the persons concerned from the time bar, which the Tribunal is in any event bound to apply since it is mandatory'."
Keywords:
binding character; decision; effective date; exception; iloat statute; mandatory time limit; organisation's duties; staff member's interest; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1983
89th Session, 2000
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant's contract was not extended. "It is true that the complainant was aware of the organization's intentions, having been informed of them several times, in particular, in a talk with the Director of the [organization's] service in France on 6 November 1997 and by the fax messages of 11 and 20 November 1997. Nevertheless, she was right to wait for official notification of an administrative decision from the competent authorities of [the organization] before challenging the measure. Although the letter of 16 January 1998 signed by the Director of the [organization's] service in France appears to be merely a letter of confirmation, it is the only official administrative decision adversely affecting the complainant. Her letter of 6 February 1998 seeking a review of it was therefore in time."
Keywords:
cause of action; confirmatory decision; decision; duty to inform; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; separation from service; staff member's interest;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As to the absence of one month's notice, [the organization] rightly points out that the obligation arising from the provisions of the Staff Regulations applies to dismissal and not to non-renewal of a fixed-term appointment. Nonetheless, the case law says that an organisation must always give the reasons for a decision not to renew an appointment and those reasons must be notified to the staff member within a reasonable time."
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; precedence of rules; separation from service; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1968
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The [...] ground of alleged irreceivability[,that the decision to promote a colleague did not adversely affect the complainant,] is [...] untenable. [The two staff members] were at the same grade, in the same career stream, and both are entitled to expect that promotions will only be made fairly and objectively, based on merit and in accordance with law."
Keywords:
career; cause of action; decision; equal treatment; organisation's duties; patere legem; promotion; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1966
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10 and 12
Extract:
"Even if [a] practice [of distributing internal personal mail could create] an obligation upon the Office, it should be emphasised that such an obligation could involve limits relating, for example, to the content, nature and purpose of the mail that it is requested to distribute. [The] staff members [of the organisation] do not enjoy an absolute right to have information or documents of any type distributed through the office's facilities."
Keywords:
effect; limits; organisation's duties; practice; right;
Judgment 1929
88th Session, 2000
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Compulsory transfer of a disciplinary nature must afford the staff member the safeguards available in the case of disciplinary sanctions, that is the right of the staff member to be heard before the sanction is ordered, with the option for him to participate in the full processing of the evidence and to make all his pleas. [...] It matters little in this respect whether or not transfer is envisaged among the disciplinary sanctions set out in the Staff Regulations. What is decisive is whether the transfer appears to be the consequence of the alleged professional shortcomings of the staff member which may, by their nature, give rise to disciplinary sanctions."
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; hidden disciplinary measure; organisation's duties; right to reply; safeguard; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant was transferred without prior notice and without an opportunity to be heard. "Taken together, the material circumstances give grounds for considering that the impugned transfer partly constituted a hidden disciplinary sanction. [...] The impugned decision must, therefore, be set aside and the procedure resumed from the point at which it was flawed [...]."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 10 OF THE UPU STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; hidden disciplinary measure; organisation's duties; remand; right to reply; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
Judgment 1924
88th Session, 2000
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant accepted a settlement proposal by the organization within the imposed deadline. However, four months went by and he heard nothing more on the subject so he wrote to inquire when the settlement would be effected. One month later he was informed that the organization had learned that certain costs would be higher than it had foreseen, therefore, it preferred that the dispute be decided by the Administrative Tribunal. "Efforts made for the resolution of disputes are to be encouraged and the principle of good faith requires that if an offer is accepted the other party cannot then withdraw from it. The offer [...] should, accordingly, be implemented."
Keywords:
acceptance; good faith; intention of parties; offer; offer withdrawn; organisation's duties; promise; settlement out of court; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1912
88th Session, 2000
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The organisation amended the Staff Regulations. The text adopted by the Council was a simplified version of the text that had been submitted for the opinion of a committee having staff representatives. The organisation maintains that the Chairman of the Staff Association indicated that the opposition to the text on the grounds of principle was unlikely to be removed by the simplified text and that another meeting of the Committee would be useless. "The fact that the Chairman of the Staff Association has made his position known does not mean that there is no need to consult an official body, made up of representatives of the administration and the staff who are entitled to make their views known quite independently and whose opinions can develop in the course of a discussion."
Keywords:
advisory body; advisory opinion; amendment to the rules; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union;
Consideration 11
Extract:
The organisation amended the Staff Regulations. The text adopted by the Council was a simplified version of text that had been submitted for the opinion of a committee having staff representatives. "A further consultation of a body which must give its opinion on a draft text is necessary only if substantial changes are made to the text[...]."
Keywords:
advisory body; advisory opinion; amendment to the rules; organisation's duties; purport; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The methodologies adopted by international organisations for setting and adjusting the remuneration of the staff, in principle, must enable results to be obtained that are stable, foreseeable and clearly understood [...] when the applicable method uses an external index, [...] not with a view to requiring the competent body to conform automatically to the index, but only as a simple orientation', which in itself is not a breach of any rights, the staff can only be protected against arbitrariness if the criteria used in deviating from the suggested orientation of the external index are objective, adequate and known to the staff."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821
Keywords:
adjustment; bias; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; criteria; duty to inform; organisation's duties; rule of another organisation; salary; scale;
Judgment 1911
88th Session, 2000
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
"It is a general principle of the international civil service that there must be a valid reason for any decision not to renew a fixed-term contract and that the reason must be given to the staff member [...]. An official whose fixed-term contract is reaching expiry must be informed in a timely manner of the real reasons for the decision not to renew it [...]. In this case a mere reference to a letter sent to the complainant nearly two years previously cannot, in the absence of any other indication as to the real reasons for the decision to be taken, exempt the observatory from stating the grounds clearly."
Keywords:
contract; date; decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; general principle; grounds; international civil service principles; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; separation from service;
Judgment 1906
88th Session, 2000
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant argues that, since none of [the instances of insubordination and improper activity which were noted by the organization] was ever made the object of disciplinary proceedings against him, they cannot be invoked as reasons in support of the decision not to renew his contract. The complainant is wrong. An organization is never under an obligation to launch disciplinary proceedings against a staff member and, where that person's appointment is drawing to an end, the fact that there are possible disciplinary infractions on his part may properly be considered when the administration is deciding whether or not to offer him a new contract."
Keywords:
contract; disciplinary procedure; grounds; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; separation from service;
Judgment 1901
88th Session, 2000
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 8-9
Extract:
The organization refused the complainant both an unsuitability and an invalidity pension. It explains that it couldn't arrange for a final medical examination at the time of the complainant's dismissal because he was in prison. "The Tribunal cannot accept that argument. Under Article R II 4.18 of the Staff Regulations, a medical examination is compulsory when a contract is terminated, for whatever reason. In view of the particular circumstances of the case, [the organization] should have been at particular pains to comply with that rule. In the absence of such an examination the pension fund should have determined whether, upon termination of service, the complainant was to be treated as unfit for work because of a deterioration in his physical or mental health which occurred while he was employed by [the organization]. The administrator of the Pension Fund was, therefore, wrong [...] when he refused to consider the complainant's entitlement to a pension for unsuitability." The case was sent back to the Pension Fund.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R II 4.18 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF CERN
Keywords:
cern pension fund; disability benefit; due process; incapacity; invalidity; medical examination; organisation's duties; pension; pension entitlements; procedure before the tribunal; refusal; service-incurred; termination of employment;
Judgment 1897
88th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"As the organisation did not contest the receivability of a premature appeal [...] during the internal procedure, the principle of good faith prevents it from doing so subsequently."
Keywords:
good faith; internal appeal; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 6
Extract:
A general principle of law has it that the legal situation of someone cannot be modified before they have had an opportunity to be heard. This principle is also valid for international organisations and the Tribunal [...].
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; organisation's duties; right to be heard;
Judgment 1893
88th Session, 2000
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
By its Judgment 1814 the Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the complainant's appeal and sent the case back to the organization. The Tribunal considers that "Judgment 1814 did not imply that his case succeeded on the merits; its sole objective was to send the case back to [the organization]'s competent bodies so that a lawful decision could be taken."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1814
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; decision; decision quashed; due process; flaw; internal appeal; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; purport; remand;
Judgment 1892
88th Session, 2000
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
By its Judgment 1814 the Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the complainant's appeal and sent the case back to the organisation. The Tribunal considers that "it was appropriate to resume the procedure by referring the matter back to the Joint Committee for Disputes because it was the unlawful nature of the latter's opinion that led to the quashing of the decision. However, proper execution of the judgment did not necessarily imply recognition that the complainant's appeal was sound: all that was required was a new decision taken after due process."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1814
Keywords:
application for execution; case sent back to organisation; decision; decision quashed; due process; execution of judgment; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; purport; remand; report;
Judgment 1889
87th Session, 1999
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant was assigned to Chad in 1991 and contracted Hepatitis B in 1993. "The Appeals Committee considers that the medical service did not completely fulfil its role and did not offer the staff member concerned the advice that it could have supplied. The Appeals Committee even refers to responsibility being equally shared'. In practice, there could be no grave fault of the medical service incurring the responsibility of the organization unless the protective measures recommended by a competent authority had been disregarded. In the material case, the organization demonstrates that in 1991 [...] the World Health Organization's guidelines did not specifically recommend vaccination against Hepatitis B for persons posted to African countries affected by an endemic illness of this type."
Keywords:
breach; illness; liability; medical consultant; negligence; no provision; organisation; organisation's duties; rule of another organisation; service-incurred;
Judgment 1878
87th Session, 1999
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 31
Extract:
"It is not acceptable that the organization, in defending this complaint, disclaims all responsibility for any alleged shortcomings of the Appeals Board."
Keywords:
flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; liability; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; reply;
Judgment 1875
87th Session, 1999
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 32
Extract:
"An international organisation is liable for the material and moral damages resulting from the injury caused to a staff member by his superior (acting in the course of his duties and not in a private capacity) by treatment that is an affront to the staff member's personal and professional dignity (Judgment 1609 [...]); and for victimisation consequent upon improper treatment (Judgment 1376 [...]). A staff member is entitled to have his good name vindicated by the organisation when a superior makes false allegations against him and to redress for the harm caused ([see] Judgment[s] 1340 [and] 1344 [...]). When a third party makes false allegations against a staff member, the organisation should communicate its view that the allegations are without foundation (Judgment 1376 [...])."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1340, 1344, 1376, 1609
Keywords:
abuse of power; burden of proof; compensation; injury; liability; material damages; material injury; misuse of authority; moral injury; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; supervisor;
Judgment 1872
87th Session, 1999
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Since the procedure that was instigated was not a disciplinary one, but a procedure for the termination of the complainant's appointment for unsatisfactory service, the complainant needed to be informed in due time, either through a negative performance appraisal report, or through precise warnings, that the organisation was not satisfied with his performance and that if he did not improve it his appointment would be terminated." (see Judgment 1484)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1484
Keywords:
disciplinary procedure; duty to inform; organisation's duties; performance report; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; warning;
Consideration 7
Extract:
This case is about a decision concerning termination of employment for unsatisfactory services.
"International officials have the right to be informed, from the beginning of the procedure, of the grounds which will serve as a basis for the administration's decision".
Keywords:
decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1865
87th Session, 1999
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7 and 10
Extract:
"Article 46(5) of the Service Regulations states that 'for a period of two years from the date on which assignment to reserve status takes effect a permanent employee shall have priority for reinstatement in any post corresponding to his grade which may fall vacant or be created, provided that he possesses the necessary qualifications and ability.' The obligation of [the organisation] is not to reinstate the official who has been assigned to reserve status, but to make all the necessary efforts for his reinstatement. In other words, it is not an obligation as to the outcome, but as to the means employed to achieve the outcome."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 46(5) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
condition; creation of post; criteria; organisation's duties; priority; qualifications; reinstatement; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >
|
