ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

Terms of appointment (249, 251, 252, 253, 968, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 945, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 666, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 661, 660, 686, 309, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 648, 654, 671, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 677, 378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 649, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 500, 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 836,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Terms of appointment
Total judgments found: 123

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >

  • Judgment 4624


    135th Session, 2023
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant takes issue with the type of contract successively awarded to her by the ILO and seeks adequate compensation for the injury she considers she has suffered.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; contract; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 4550


    134th Session, 2022
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the “social democracy” reform introduced by decision CA/D 2/14 and implemented in particular by Circular No. 356.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    [A]s the Tribunal has already stated on several occasions, staff members of an international organisation enjoy the right to association freely and there is an implicit clause in their contract of employment compelling the organisation to respect that right (see, in particular, Judgments 496, consideration 6, 3414, consideration 4, and 4482, consideration 5).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 496, 3414, 4482

    Keywords:

    contract; freedom of association; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 4482


    133rd Session, 2022
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the “social democracy” reform introduced by decision CA/D 2/14.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    This case presents a situation where a remedy, which may intrude into the exercise of power by the Administrative Council, is appropriate to protect a fundamental right of a member of staff and, indeed, all members of staff which was a term of their appointment as officials of the EPO. The adoption of those parts of the new rules concerning elections by decision CA/D 2/14 entailed non-observance of that term of appointment. There can be no doubt that freedom of association is a well-recognised and acknowledged universal right which all workers should enjoy. It is recognised as a right by the Tribunal (see Judgment 4194). It is a right recognised in the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, Article 2(a), as an obligation for all ILO Member States arising from the very fact of their membership in the ILO. Freedom of association is a right recognised by the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 22, and also by the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 8.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4194

    Keywords:

    compensation; freedom of association; ilo instruments; international instrument; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3938


    125th Session, 2018
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to confirm her appointment due to the rejection of her application for a work visa by the authorities of the country of her duty station.

    Considerations 11 and 12

    Extract:

    [The Organization] advised the complainant that [...] the [host State] authorities [...] would not issue her an entry visa [...].
    As the complainant’s appointment was conditional on her obtaining a work visa, her appointment was not confirmed. It follows that as she was not a UNESCO official, her complaint is irreceivable and will be dismissed.

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; non official; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3726


    123rd Session, 2017
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her claim for compensation on account of labour exploitation and compulsory labour.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal does not consider that the general nature of clause 11 renders it illegal, as the complainant submits, but considers that the IOM Administration, with the knowledge of the ICSC job classification system, would have been aware that such a clause permits it to assign only such additional tasks and responsibilities to the complainant as were compatible with her G.5 grade.

    Keywords:

    terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3483


    120th Session, 2015
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the FAO’s decision not to pay her a daily subsistence allowance during her appointment in Rome.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; daily subsistence allowance; decision quashed; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3351


    118th Session, 2014
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: As the internal appeal was time-barred, the Tribunal dismissed the complaint seeking the payment of an allowance.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; duty station; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3257


    116th Session, 2014
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision to offer him a one-year extension of his fixed-term contract rather than the two-year extensions he had previously received.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed; contract; decision quashed; discretion; extension of contract; fixed-term; offer; performance report; procedural flaw; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3188


    114th Session, 2013
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions not to update her job description, not to select her for a G-6 position and her alleged subsequent demotion.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "It is well settled in the Tribunal’s case law that a failure to respond to a legitimate request of a staff member within a reasonable time may be deemed to be a refusal of the request if the staff member elects to accept that refusal. Additionally, egregious delay in responding to a reasonable request may involve a breach of the obligation to deal with the staff member in good faith. In the present case, the failure of the IAEA to provide the complainant with an updated job description over several years involved a violation of her rights for which she is entitled to compensation."

    Keywords:

    compensation; good faith; moral injury; organisation's duties; refusal; request by a party; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3135


    113th Session, 2012
    Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    The Tribunal […] draws attention to the fact that, generally speaking, the terms of employment of staff members of international organisations may vary according to amendments of the existing staff regulations or staff rules and that such references to the original provisions as may be contained in their employment contracts do not prevent this.

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; applicable law; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3112


    113th Session, 2012
    International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant did not sign the offer of appointment within the time limit prescribed by the organisation.
    "As the complainant herself acknowledged, there were still unresolved issues that she wished to have settled before entering into a contract. Accordingly, it cannot be said that at that time there was any contractual relationship between the parties, let alone an employment relationship. As there was no employment relationship, the complainant was not an official of the organisation. It follows that the Tribunal is not competent to hear the complaint and that, therefore, it must be dismissed."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; competence of tribunal; complaint; contract; non official; offer; offer withdrawn; official; refusal; status of complainant; terms of appointment; time limit;



  • Judgment 3090


    112th Session, 2012
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal may rule on any employment relationship arising between an organisation and its staff, whether under the terms of a contract or under Staff Regulations. If a decision to appoint an employee, or to terminate his or her employment, is challenged on the grounds that it affects the rights of the person concerned which the Tribunal is competent to safeguard, the Tribunal must rule on the lawfulness of the disputed decision. It is immaterial whether the employee in question was recruited under a contract and whether that contract was for a fixed term. (See Judgment 1272, under 9.)"

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1272

    Keywords:

    appointment; competence of tribunal; contract; duration of appointment; official; right; safeguard; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "[WIPO's] employment relationship with the complainant always rested on short-term contracts [...]. These contracts were systematically renewed without any notable breaks, with the result that [...] the complainant pursued a career in the Organization for more than seven years, i.e. until the expiry of [her last] contract. This long succession of short-term contracts gave rise to a legal relationship between the complainant and WIPO which was equivalent to that on which permanent staff members of an organisation may rely. In considering that the complainant belonged to the category of short-term employees to whom the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules do not apply and who do not enjoy legal protection comparable to that enjoyed by other staff members, the defendant failed to recognise the real nature of its legal relationship with the complainant. In so doing it committed an error of law and misused the rules governing short-term contracts."

    Keywords:

    abuse of power; applicable law; career; contract; difference; extension of contract; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; permanent appointment; short-term; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; temporary-indefinite; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3074


    112th Session, 2012
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15-16

    Extract:

    "[I]nternational organisations' staff members do not have a right to have all the conditions of employment laid down in the provisions of the staff rules and regulations in force at the time of their recruitment applied to them throughout their career.
    [M]ost of those conditions [can] be altered during [their] employment as a result of amendments to those provisions. Of course the position is different if, having regard to the nature and importance of the provision in question, the complainant has an acquired right to its continued application. However, according to the case law established in Judgment 61, clarified in Judgment 832 and confirmed in Judgment 986, the amendment of a provision governing an official's situation to his or her detriment constitutes a breach of an acquired right only when such an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations, or alters fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on. In order for there to be a breach of an acquired right, the amendment to the applicable text must therefore relate to a fundamental and essential term of employment within the meaning of Judgment 832 (in this connection see also Judgments 2089, 2682, 2696 or 2986). The conditions for the payment of removal expenses, in particular a limit on the volume of household goods which may be shipped at the Organization's expense, plainly do not have this character [...]."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 61, 832, 986, 2089, 2682, 2696, 2986

    Keywords:

    acquired right; amendment to the rules; applicable law; appointment; breach; career; condition; contract; date; exception; limits; official; personal effects; provision; removal expenses; right; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2972


    110th Session, 2011
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    Existence of an acquired right to work night shifts and to receive the corresponding allowance.
    "An acquired right is breached when 'an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations by altering fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on' (see Judgment 2682, under 6)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2682

    Keywords:

    acceptance; acquired right; amendment to the rules; breach; condition; contract; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "An acquired right may derive 'from the terms of appointment, the staff rules or from a decision' (see Judgment 2696, under 5)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2696

    Keywords:

    acquired right; decision; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "It was recognised in Judgment 666 that 'an allowance may form an essential part of the official's contract [...] and its abolition would therefore constitute breach of [an] acquired right'. However, it was also said in that case that an official 'has no acquired right to the actual amount of the allowance or to continuance of any particular method of reckoning it. Indeed, he must expect these to change as circumstances change'."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 666

    Keywords:

    acquired right; allowance; amount; contract; night differential; payment; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2918


    109th Session, 2010
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "Article II, paragraph 5, of the Tribunal's Statute [...] provides that: 'The Tribunal shall also be competent to hear complaints alleging non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of officials and of provisions of the Staff Regulations of any [...] international organization [...] which has addressed to the Director-General a declaration, recognizing [...] the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for this purpose, as well as its Rules of Procedure, and which is approved by the Governing Body.' The consequence of that provision is that the Tribunal may hear the two complaints only if the complainant was, at the relevant times, an official of the [organization] and the [organization] has recognised the jurisdiction of the Tribunal."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute

    Keywords:

    breach; competence of tribunal; limits; status of complainant; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2915


    109th Session, 2010
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "It is correct that a vested right cannot be divested without the consent of the person to whom it belongs. However, it does not follow that a corresponding condition or obligation - in this case, the condition or obligation to retire at 60 - depends on continuing consent. A condition once accepted or an obligation once entered [...] endures unless and until it is performed or the person is released from it either absolutely or by substitution of a different and mutually agreed condition or obligation."

    Keywords:

    complainant; condition; effect; lack of consent; successive contracts; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2839


    107th Session, 2009
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    "[I]t cannot be said that the Organization engaged in any meaningful consultation with the complainant regarding her reassignment. Providing her with Terms of Reference for a post that she did not know was intended for her, arranging for a meeting with her proposed new Director without being informed of her planned transfer, and a meeting with the Regional Director when the decision had already been taken does not constitute proper consultation."

    Keywords:

    assignment; consultation; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity; staff member's interest; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2819


    107th Session, 2009
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "As the transfer decision did not respect the complainant's dignity, the Tribunal will order that the complainant be reassigned, within 28 days, to a post that satisfies the core requirement of a grade A6 post, namely, the running of a prominent organisational unit covering several specialised fields, and that the decision of 22 December 2005 be quashed with effect from the date of his reassignment to the new post."

    Keywords:

    compensatory measure; grade; order; post; respect for dignity; terms of appointment; transfer; working conditions;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "It is well settled that a transfer decision, if of a nondisciplinary nature, «must show due regard, in both form and substance, for the dignity of the official concerned, particularly by providing him with work of the same level as that which he performed in his previous post and matching his qualifications» (see Judgment 2229, under 3(a)). Given that the new tasks of the complainant involve none of the tasks specified in the Service Regulations for a grade A6 post, it must be concluded that the transfer did not respect his dignity. There are two other matters that indicate a lack of respect for the complainant's dignity. First, there is the Vice- President's e-mail of 9 January 2006 that was transmitted to all other Principal Directors in his Directorate and that clearly impugned the complainant's ability to perform his functions as head of the Joint Cluster Computers. [...] There was no need to justify the decision to the complainant's peers and the e-mail could only lessen his standing in their eyes. The second matter is that the complainant was not provided with any staff - not even a secretary."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2229

    Keywords:

    grade; post; respect for dignity; status of complainant; terms of appointment; transfer; working conditions;



  • Judgment 2783


    106th Session, 2009
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 12-14

    Extract:

    The complainant, who parks his car in the Vienna International Centre (VIC), is challenging the decision to double the monthly parking fee effective 1 January 2007.
    "In the present case, the impugned decision affects the complainant not as a staff member of the Agency but in his capacity as a user of the VIC garage. Moreover, the financial conditions governing the use of this garage, which is merely a facility offered to the staff of the various international organisations occupying the VIC, do not form part of the complainant's terms of appointment or of the Agency's Staff Regulations.
    'While the payment of the fee for the use of the garage does in fact take the form of a direct deduction from the Agency's staff members' salaries, this is simply a means of payment adopted for convenience sake, which does not in any way alter the nature of the fee and does not, in particular, have the effect of incorporating it into the complainant's terms of employment. In this respect, the deduction is comparable to those which an employer may effect from an employee's wages for the purpose of paying, for example, a tax or contribution that is levied at source; here too, the fact that the tax or contribution is so deducted does not afford grounds for considering it to be part of the employee's terms of employment.
    This dispute does not therefore fall within the scope of the [...] provisions of Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute of the Tribunal."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; amount; competence of tribunal; condition; contract; deduction; effect; facilities; iloat statute; increase; official; payment; provision; salary; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; tax; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2732


    105th Session, 2008
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal rejects the complainant's assertion that the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules did not form part of her contract. The complainant's contract stipulated: '[y]our terms of employment, benefits and obligations will be those stated in [the] letter [of appointment], in the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules [...]'. Thus, it is clear that the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules were specifically incorporated by reference into her contract. As to her claim that she did not have access to the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, the complainant could have requested a copy thereof before signing the contract but did not do so."

    Keywords:

    contract; request by a party; social benefits; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >


 
Last updated: 30.04.2024 ^ top