Appointment (293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 661, 660, 686,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Appointment
Total judgments found: 204
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
Judgment 3503
120th Session, 2015
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the lawfulness of the appointment of two staff members to grade G-6 posts.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; right of appeal; vacancy;
Judgment 3494
120th Session, 2015
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of her candidature for a position in Eurocontrol.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competence; complaint allowed; decision quashed; delegated authority;
Judgment 3412
119th Session, 2015
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges an appointment to a position for which he had applied, claiming discrimination.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; selection board;
Judgment 3381
118th Session, 2014
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complaint was summarily dismissed on the ground that the complainant was not an official for the purpose of Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute.
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As there was no meeting of minds between the parties concerning an appointment and the complainant did not become a staff member of IOM and, therefore, not an official for the purpose of Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute, the complaint is clearly irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute
Keywords:
appointment; non official; official; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; summary procedure;
Judgment 3370
118th Session, 2014
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who performed duties at a higher level than his grade, impugns the decision not to grant him a promotion and acting allowance, and partially succeeds on the basis that the Organisation breached its duty of care.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; special post allowance;
Judgment 3308
117th Session, 2014
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, acting as a member of the Staff Committee, impugns the Administrative Council’s decision modifying the power of the appointing authority to adopt a new recruitment procedure for Principal Directors.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; complaint dismissed;
Judgment 3288
116th Session, 2014
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges a recruitment process.
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Tribunal is of the opinion that, following the guidelines set out in Judgment 2959, the present complaint is unfounded. As Regulation 4.3 uses the term “normally”, the Tribunal finds that the Regulations governing the selection of staff members will be followed as written unless there is an exceptional situation in which it is not practicable to do so for objective reasons. Unlike the situation leading to Judgment 2959, the present complaint stems from a direct appointment that indeed can be considered as having occurred based on the “impracticability” of following the usual competitive selection process."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2959
Keywords:
appointment; competition; interpretation; post; provision; written rule;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; competition; complaint dismissed;
Judgment 3262
116th Session, 2014
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who applied for the position of Legal Advisor, was offered the post, but at a grade lower than that at which it was advertised.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acceptance; appointment; candidate; compensation; contract; grade; moral injury; offer; offer withdrawn; post; respect for dignity;
Judgment 3209
115th Session, 2013
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant accuses the ITU of having failed in its duty to ensure transparency in a selection process.
Consideration 11
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law, an appointment by an international organisation is a decision that lies within the discretion of its executive head. Being subject to only limited review, it may be set aside only if it was taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some material fact was overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if a clearly wrong conclusion was drawn from the evidence. Nevertheless, anyone who applies for a post to be filled by some process of selection is entitled to have his application considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition. That is a right that every applicant must enjoy, whatever his hopes of success may be (see, inter alia, Judgment 2163, under 1, and the case law cited therein).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2163
Keywords:
appointment; competition; discretion; judicial review; selection procedure;
Judgment 3206
115th Session, 2013
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complaint, which aims at the cancellation of a contested appointment, is allowed.
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant challenges the decision to appoint a colleague to a grade D-2 position through a direct recruitment procedure. The Tribunal finds that there was no valid reason to apply such a procedure. “The Director General was therefore right to conclude […] that [the] appointment […] was unlawful. However, he was mistaken in believing that this did not oblige him to withdraw that appointment. Since this unlawful decision was the subject of an internal appeal validly filed by another staff member who had cause of action, the Director General had no option but to withdraw it. [T]he fact that [the colleague in question] had left the Organization’s service in the meantime did not alter that duty […].”
Keywords:
appointment; cause of action; competition; flaw; internal appeal; selection procedure;
Consideration 20
Extract:
“[T]he complainant has no cause of action in seeking the repayment of [the] emoluments [paid to the colleague whose appointment he challenges] or calling into question her pension rights, as these measures would have no bearing on his own situation (see, for example, Judgment 2281, under 4(a) and (b)).”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2281
Keywords:
appointment; cause of action; lack of injury; locus standi; pension entitlements;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; complaint allowed; decision quashed;
Judgment 3191
114th Session, 2013
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants successfully challenge a recruitment procedure which they considered as flawed.
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The EPO’s position grounded on a distinction between an appointment and a promotion is fundamentally flawed. An appointment is simply the assignment of an individual to a particular position or post. A promotion is the assignment of an individual to a higher position or rank. The fact that a so called appointment process is used to make a selection or that the assignment is called an appointment does not exclude the fact that it may also be a promotion by virtue of the fact that it also involves the attainment of a higher position or rank or, in this context, grade."
Keywords:
appointment; competition; executive head; flaw; promotion; promotion board; selection board; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 3186
114th Session, 2013
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select her to several positions for which she had applied.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3185, 3187
Keywords:
appointment; competition; complaint dismissed; selection procedure; status of complainant;
Judgment 3182
114th Session, 2013
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the decision not to appoint her to a position for which she applied, although she ranked first in the technical evaluation.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; complaint allowed; flaw; mistaken conclusion; recommendation; selection procedure;
Judgment 3176
114th Session, 2013
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the appointment by direct selection of a staff member.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3175
Keywords:
appointment; complaint allowed; selection procedure;
Judgment 3157
114th Session, 2013
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the lawfulness of the selection process for a post for which he had unsuccessfully applied.
Considerations 9 and 11
Extract:
"[H]aving regard to the submissions [...], the Tribunal notes that the complainant was excluded from the technical evaluation on the grounds that he did not possess all the required qualifications, but that the [three] candidates shortlisted [...] did not possess them either. [...] [T]he complainant received unequal treatment when the shortlist was established. As the selection process is tainted with a flaw, the impugned decision must be set aside and the disputed appointment must be cancelled [...]. The Organization must shield the successful candidate from any injury that might result from the cancellation of his appointment, which he accepted in good faith."
Keywords:
appointment; breach; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; consequence; criteria; degree; equal treatment; good faith; grounds; internal competition; lack of injury; organisation's duties; procedural flaw;
Judgment 3130
113th Session, 2012
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure;
Judgment 3125
113th Session, 2012
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; complaint allowed; decision quashed; extension of contract;
Judgment 3110
113th Session, 2012
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
[A]s pointed out in Judgment 3032 in relation to the same provisions on which the complainant relies, “when an international organisation wants to fill a post by competition, it must comply with the material rules and the general precepts of the case law”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3032
Keywords:
appointment; competition; organisation's duties; selection procedure;
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;
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;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
|
