Payslip (364,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Payslip
Total judgments found: 29

< previous | 1, 2

• Judgment 2410

  
  98th Session, 2005
  European Organization for Nuclear Research
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "[M]onthly pension payments are not notified individually except when pensioners are informed of decisions concerning the rate of adjustment decided by CERN's competent bodies. In the circumstances, the Tribunal considers that, while the bank statement does not constitute a decision, it does reflect a decision taken to credit the complainant's account and, just like a payslip, this decision may be challenged by all legal means."

  Keywords:

  adjustment; date of notification; decision; general decision; individual decision; payslip; pension; rate; receivability of the complaint; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1798

  
  86th Session, 1999
  European Molecular Biology Laboratory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  "A strong line of precedent has it that payslips are individual decisions which may be challenged before the Tribunal. [...] Even though the council has reserved its right to alter pay for July 1996 later, and retroactively, the impugned decisions do show a cause of action."

  Keywords:

  amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; discretion; executive body; individual decision; payslip; tribunal;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1641

  
  83rd Session, 1997
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  The complainants are challenging the methodology laid down for carrying out salary surveys and a decision by WIPO reflected in their pay slips to apply that method. The Tribunal holds that they have a cause of action, which is is to obtain from the Tribunal "a declaration that the rule and the decision they are challenging would still be unlawful even if they had later got the increase that was withheld for the six months prior to the general survey. They would indeed have been slightly better off had they received the increase earlier. They are also entitled to a decision as to whether the rule they are challenging holds good for the future."

  Keywords:

  adjustment; cause of action; decision; decision quashed; increase; increment withheld; inquiry; investigation; payslip; receivability of the complaint; salary; scale;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1408

  
  78th Session, 1995
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  "The decision not to allow the abatement of internal tax had a continuing effect which was reflected in each of the complainant's payslips."

  Keywords:

  date of notification; decision; payslip; right of appeal; time limit;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1368

  
  77th Session, 1994
  European Organization for Nuclear Research
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  "For the reasons given in Judgment 1329, under 6, the complainants may not directly seek the quashing of the Council's decision [...]. They may, however, challenge the individual decisions in their pay slips [...] by pleading the unlawfulness of the [Council's decision] and the infringement of any acquired rights they lay claim to under rules or contract."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1329
  

  Keywords:

  acquired right; application for quashing; breach; contract; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1122

  
  71st Session, 1991
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "The complaints are challenging pay slips [reflecting the so-called 'Eurocontrol reduction'], of which the latest date back to September 1989, and they were filed on 27 August 1990, long after the time limits had expired." They are irreceivable.

  Keywords:

  adjustment; complaint; payslip; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; salary; time bar; time limit;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1012

  
  68th Session, 1990
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  The decision to reduce pay at Eurocontrol was confirmed on 12 November 1987. "Though the pay slips [giving effect to the reduction] are plainly unlawful because the Commission's decision still had to come into effect, they apply only to the period they cover and cannot be treated as giving effect to a decision that had not yet become final. Not a single complainant has challenged an individual decision subsequent to 12 November 1987. The Tribunal is therefore bound, regrettably, to declare the claims irreceivable insofar as they object to future reductions in pay."

  Keywords:

  application for quashing; effective date; enforcement; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; salary;
  

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "In line with the principles the Tribunal affirmed in Judgments 624 and 902 the complainants may challenge the Director General's decisions to apply the general measures to them and may thereby also challenge the lawfulness of the commission's decisions. [...] The defendant's objections to receivability fail insofar as they relate to the pay slips the complainants received in July, August and September 1987" and which informed them of reductions made to their salary.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 624, 902
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 963

  
  66th Session, 1989
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Summary

  Extract:

  The complainants received notification in their pay slips of a 0.7 per cent reduction in the refundable amount of education expenses which they had incurred. The organisation contends that the pay slips merely confirmed earlier decisions, viz. a general decision of 7 July 1987. The Tribunal holds that the impugned decisions were individual ones that cause the complainants injury, and not confirmations of earlier decisions.

  Keywords:

  cause of action; confirmatory decision; decision; deduction; education expenses; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; refund; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 882

  
  64th Session, 1988
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  The complainant maintains that the time-limit for lodging an internal appeal should run from the date on which he received the first pay-slip showing his new grading. To support that view he cites Judgment No. 753 of 12 June 1986. In the view of the Tribunal, the complainant "misreads Judgment 753: what the Tribunal held was that payment of salary might be treated as a challengeable decision only when there was no other."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 753
  

  Keywords:

  date of notification; decision; formal requirements; internal appeal; payslip; start of time limit; time limit;
  

< previous | 1, 2