|
|
 |
|
|
Offer (324, 325, 326, 327,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Offer
Total judgments found: 57
1, 2, 3 | next >
Judgment 3748
123rd Session, 2017
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the Global Fund’s decision to withdraw an offer of employment allegedly made to her by the Chief Procurement Officer.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; offer;
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acceptance; appointment; candidate; compensation; contract; grade; moral injury; offer; offer withdrawn; post; respect for dignity;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 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.
Considerations 11 and 12
Extract:
"These facts were significant as they highlight the need for reasons in this case because these circumstances impacted the complainant’s ability to assess whether he should have accepted the offer of the one-year extension of his contract and whether he should challenge the decision.
It is also significant that the complainant was reminded of the deadline [...], when he had not yet received the explanation. Additionally, it was in the letter [...], which included the explanation, that the Executive Secretary informed the complainant that his contract would expire [...] because he had failed to accept the offer of extension. The Tribunal therefore finds that the decision to offer the one-year extension to the complainant was flawed by the failure of the Administration to provide a timely explanation for that decision."
Keywords:
case law; contract; decision; duration of appointment; extension of contract; flaw; notice; offer; termination of employment;
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 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 2848
107th Session, 2009
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
"Having regard to the complainant's actions and his persistent, disingenuous attempts to reformulate the contents of communications, the Tribunal finds that the complainant's assertion that he did not reject the offer of the appointment as Chief of Cabinet and Director of ODG is not credible, and that he indeed rejected that offer on 1 August 2002. In the circumstances, the Organization was under no obligation to keep the offer open for any further period. Since it was not kept open, its purported acceptance did not give rise to a binding contract."
Keywords:
acceptance; appointment; binding character; contract; law of contract; limits; notice; offer; organisation's duties; reasonable time;
Consideration 20
Extract:
"As the Tribunal reiterated in Judgment 2592, under 14, it is well established in the case law that «[t]here is a binding contract if there is manifest on both sides an intention to contract and if all the essential terms have been settled and if all that remains to be done is a formality which requires no further agreement»."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2592
Keywords:
acceptance; binding character; contract; effect; intention of parties; law of contract; offer;
Judgment 2729
105th Session, 2008
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[I]f a donor government offers to fund the post of an associate expert for a further period, there is an obligation on the organisation in question to consider that offer in good faith. So much is implicit in the general duties of care and good faith owed by an organisation to its staff. That is not to say, however, that an organisation is bound to accept any such offer. It is simply to say that a person [...] is then entitled to have his or her contract renewed unless there is a valid reason for rejecting the offer. The same duty of good faith requires that an organisation not do anything to prevent such an offer being made."
Keywords:
contract; decision; good faith; grounds; legitimate expectation; non-renewal of contract; offer; organisation's duties; period; post; refusal;
Judgment 2667
104th Session, 2008
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The complainant now claims that when she signed her initial contract the Organization did not inform her of the consequences of her declaration [concerning her residential address] or, in particular, of the differences between local and international status. But this assertion cannot be accepted. It was up to the complainant to ask the Organization about the implications of the main clauses of the offer she was invited to accept and about the consequences of her replies on points which were decisive for her future career and salary. Rapid perusal of the Staff Regulations and Rules would have revealed the implications of accepting the offer of local recruitment."
Keywords:
acceptance; consequence; contract; law of contract; local status; non-local status; offer; organisation's duties; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2558
101st Session, 2006
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5(b)
Extract:
The complainant accuses the Appeals Committee of having breached her defence rights by refusing to call on the Office to produce the documents she requested. "Ideally, the Appeals Committee would have given reasons for rejecting the complainant's offer of additional evidence in the form of the testimonies of seven witnesses and 15 documents that the Office was being asked to produce, or would at least have made it clear in its opinion that the evidence already produced was sufficient to lead it to an objective assessment of the relevant facts. The complainant, however, offers no convincing explanation that all these items of evidence are really relevant. The Tribunal cannot therefore consider the rejection of the proffered evidence as constituting abuse of the broad discretion that internal appeals bodies must enjoy in this area."
Keywords:
abuse of power; breach; complainant; disclosure of evidence; discretion; evidence; grounds; internal appeals body; misuse of authority; offer; oral proceedings; organisation; refusal; report; request by a party; right to reply; testimony;
Judgment 2308
96th Session, 2004
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15-18
Extract:
"The complainant seeks compensation in lost salary and benefits for the years during which she has been remunerated on the basis of short-term employment while performing work of indefinite duration equivalent to that of a fixed-term staff member. In other words, she claims a retroactive fixed-term status. There is no basis on which the complainant can claim to be treated retroactively as if she had a fixed-term contract. She was recruited as a short-term staff member without having to go through a competition process; she accepted several contract renewals. It was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide during all those years whether to renew each short-term contract or offer her a fixed-term contract [...]. She accepted and signed all the short-term contracts. [...] If it is sought to have the Tribunal treat those short-term contracts as being null, it must be shown that they have violated some fundamental and overriding principle of law or that her apparent consent thereto was vitiated (see Judgment 2097, under 11). This, the complainant has failed to do."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2097
Keywords:
acceptance; appointment; burden of proof; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; fixed-term; injury; lack of consent; law of contract; offer; short-term; status of complainant;
Judgment 2198
94th Session, 2003
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant worked, from 1993 to 2000, under a series of short-term contracts of varying durations. The complainant submits that there has been unjust enrichment on the part of the organization: it profited materially from appointing him on a short-term basis because he was doing the work of a fixed-term staff member. "The existence and validity of the contracts of employment are a complete bar to this plea. The doctrine of unjust enrichment finds its origins in the law of quasi-contract. As was said in Judgment 2097, under 20, 'the existence of a valid contract between the parties, covering the very matters which are the subject of the claim, excludes any claim of unjust enrichment'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2097
Keywords:
acceptance; contract; duration of appointment; fixed-term; intention of parties; law of contract; offer; right; short-term; successive contracts; unjust enrichment;
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant worked, from 1993 to 2000, under a series of short-term contracts of varying durations. "[A]ppointments extended by the organization to prospective employees and accepted by the latter freely, are policy matters over which the Tribunal will not interfere."
Keywords:
acceptance; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; intention of parties; judicial review; offer; short-term; successive contracts;
Judgment 2098
92nd Session, 2002
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant denies having signed an agreement for the termination of his appointment. He asked for a signed copy of the agreement but the organization cannot provide it. "The facts show beyond all doubt that the complainant accepted the [organization]'s offer. His attitude [is] tantamount to an admission that he did agree to the termination of his appointment. This is further borne out by the fact that he raised no objection when the agreement was implemented. The concurrence and reciprocity between the parties would in itself constitute sufficient evidence that a contract existed even in the absence of proof of a written agreement."
Keywords:
acceptance; agreed termination; complainant; contract; enforcement; evidence; intention of parties; lack of evidence; offer; request by a party;
Judgment 2049
91st Session, 2001
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
After lenghty negociations, the complainant accepted the offer of separation by mutual agreement (which increased by 50% his termination indemnity on the condition that he would not challenge the decision of separation either before the Appeals Board or the Tribunal). He pleads lack of consent. "The complainant cites financial difficulties and a 'reactive anxio-depressive clinical context' to demonstrate that he was in no state to consent freely. But the evidence shows that he had been examined by an expert chosen by mutual agreement between his doctor and the chief medical officer of [the organization] and that he had been found fit to resume work as from June 1996. There are no grounds for doubting that the complainant had all his mental faculties when, after lengthy negotiations, he finally accepted an offer which afforded him significant financial benefits. He has neither proved that his consent to the negotiated termination was deficient nor provided any evidence to cast doubt on its validity."
Keywords:
agreed termination; lack of consent; medical fitness; non-renewal of contract; offer; separation from service; terminal entitlements; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 2037
90th Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainants challenge the appointment of another staff member. The Appeals Committee considered that the appeals had not been filed in time. But the complainants argue that the challenged appointment was not definitive until the offer had been signed and the conditions for appointment satisfied. "When what is challenged is a contract between an organisation and a future employee, the act which may be impugned is the contract as communicated by the organisation, irrespective of the possibilities open to the contracting parties to appeal internally such as a medical examination still to be undergone [...] legal certainty requires communications from an organisation to be reliable so that all concerned know when the time limit for an appeal starts to run. this is all the more important when the organisation is not bound to reveal the exact content of the contract. In this instance, [...] since the organisation had already notified its decision and its agreement with the future [staff member] on his terms of appointment, the signing of the contract and the prior medical examination appeared to be mere formalities. It would have been sheer pedantry to insist that they be completed and the staff so informed before the appointment of the [staff member] was announced." The time limit for an appeal had therefore started to run as soon as the personnel had been informed of the contested appointment.
Keywords:
appointment; cause of action; contract; date; decision; duty to inform; formal requirements; good faith; internal appeal; medical examination; offer; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1964
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"It is within the competence of the Tribunal to determine whether or not there is a contract of appointment by which the parties are bound and which would entitle the official covered by the contract to the rights enjoyed by the officials of an organisation that has recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction. However, in the material case, the [organisation's] agreement to appoint the complainant was subject to the fulfilment of a condition which cannot be said to be a mere formality, namely, recognition that he was physically fit enough to discharge his functions. [...] Consequently, the complainant, who has never been an employee of the [organisation], is raising a matter which is not within the scope of the Tribunal's competence."
Keywords:
appointment; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; condition; contract; locus standi; medical examination; non official; offer; offer withdrawn; official; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; tribunal;
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 1916
88th Session, 2000
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant argued that the date the contract enters into force is not negotiable - it must be the date the parties actually sign the contract. "The Tribunal does not agree with the complainant. A contract is concluded when there is a firm and definitive unity of intentions between the contracting parties; it generally takes the form, particularly where, as in this case, it consists of a contract by correspondence, of an offer made by one party followed by the acceptance of the offer by the other party. [...] But in certain instances, the contract may be held to be concluded, by interpretation of the intentions of the parties, even in the absence of agreement on the subsidiary points."
Keywords:
acceptance; date; effective date; general principle; intention of parties; law of contract; offer;
Judgment 1886
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9(2)
Extract:
"The fact of accepting the offer of a new contract of indefinite duration cannot deprive the complainant of the rights he acquired whilst he was in the service of the [organisation] under successive fixed-term contracts."
Keywords:
acquired right; continuance of operations; contract; fixed-term; offer; permanent appointment; successive contracts;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant accepted an offer for a permanent contract which provided that the contract would be governed by the Staff Rules and Regulations valid as of 1 January 1997 (which would reduce his expatriation allowance). "By confining himself to the phrase 'without prejudice of my acquired rights', the complainant showed that he had no reason in principle to refuse the offer made to him, but that he merely wished to maintain his right to continue receiving the expatriation allowance at the former rate [...]. [I]n view of the above, and the fact that the [organisation] neither modified, nor proposed to modify its offer, despite the complainant's reservation, it has to be deduced that the employment relationship between the complainant and the [organisation] is based on a contract concluded after 1 January 1997. It is therefore a priori governed by the Staff Rules and Regulations which were in force at that date [...]."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; contract; date; effective date; intention of parties; non-resident allowance; offer; permanent appointment; rate; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1806
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15-17
Extract:
The Tribunal does not support the practice of the organization of not letting employees in the personnel unit hold office on the Staff Committee in order to avoid any risk of conflict of interest. The decision to offer the complainant a post in the personnel unit should never have been attached to the condition of resigning as president of the Staff Association. "It is important both to protect the right of association and to maintain a staff association's independence."
Keywords:
condition; freedom of association; offer; organisation's duties; post; practice; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity;
Judgment 1775
85th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
According to the complainant, the way he accepted the offer of employment did form a binding contract. The Tribunal considers that "[the complainant] must show an unqualified agreement and meeting of minds between the Organization and himself on the essential terms of a contract of employment. The Tribunal is unable to read [a telex from the complainant to the Organization] as anything but a counter-offer on one of the most essential terms of the proposed contract, namely remuneration. Certainly, it cannot be said to be an unqualified acceptance and the fact that it is couched in terms of a claim of right does nothing to change its character; a potential employee does not have an automatic right to any particular grade or step and an offer which specifies one figure of salary cannot be accepted by a claim to a higher figure: see Judgment 228 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 228
Keywords:
acceptance; case law; contract; grade; offer; right; salary; step;
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant claims that a binding contract did exist between the Organization and himself, despite the silence of the Organization on his counter-offer regarding the amount of his salary. The Tribunal considers that "[it cannot] be said that the Organization's reply [...] constituted by its silence on that score an acceptance of the complainant's counter-offer. Silence does not normally imply consent and the circumstances here are not such as to give rise to any inference in the complainant's favour; the terms of the Organization's [reply] are fully compatible with the conclusion that the question of salary was still unresolved and subject to further negotiation."
Keywords:
acceptance; contract; failure to answer claim; offer; salary;
Judgment 1687
84th Session, 1998
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5(a)
Extract:
"There will be no contract unless an offer is made and accepted, and both offer and acceptance take effect upon notification to the other party. Here the ILO's offer was in law no more than an intention since it was never notified to the complainant himself nor sent to his address before being withdrawn."
Keywords:
consequence; contract; extension of contract; intention of parties; non-renewal of contract; offer; request by a party;
1, 2, 3 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
