Organisation's interest (551,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Organisation's interest
Total judgments found: 209
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
Judgment 1250
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
The complainant's refusal of assignment to a post outside headquarters "was in breach of his obligation to the organization to comply with a transfer under Regulation 301.012. In view of the responsibilities of the post [to which he was assigned], that refusal impeded the effective operation of the organization [...] and amounted to misconduct."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: STAFF REGULATION 301.012
Keywords:
breach; complainant; definition; duty station; headquarters; organisation's interest; post; post description; refusal; serious misconduct; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
Judgment 1247
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has held, for example in Judgment 607 [...], though proper administration requires the setting of time limits 'they are not supposed to be a trap or a means of catching out a staff member who acts in good faith'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 607
Keywords:
case law; complainant; good faith; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's interest; time limit;
Judgment 1238
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Tribunal ordered the complainant's reinstatement in Judgment 999. But the Director-General decided that reinstatement was not in the interest of the organization and awarded him compensation. "To condemn someone to unemployment on account of a single negligent act unaccompanied by improper intention, and in circumstances that do not justify loss of confidence by the employer, is to demand a humanly impossible standard of performance by the employee and makes the right to reinstatement illusory."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 999
Keywords:
complainant; discretion; good faith; limits; negligence; organisation; organisation's interest; proportionality; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"In the circumstances the refusal of reinstatement is not justified, and the fact that dismissal occurred over five years ago does not stand in the way of reinstatement, especially since the complainant was not responsible for any of the delay. He is accordingly entitled to reinstatement."
Keywords:
date; discretion; limits; mistake of fact; organisation's interest; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"An employee who is wrongfully dismissed is ordinarily entitled to reinstatement. But the Tribunal may refuse to order it if it is not possible or advisable. It would not, for instance, order reinstatement if the circumstances of the dismissal were such that it would no longer be reasonably possible for the employee to perform his duties effectively or harmoniously or for the employer to continue to feel confidence or trust in him."
Keywords:
flaw; organisation's interest; reinstatement; termination of employment; tribunal; working relations;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Even if the Director-General has discretion to refuse reinstatement 'in the interest of the organization' he must exercise it fairly and reasonably after considering all the material facts. Here the facts were that the complainant had throughout had irreproachable appraisal reports. [...] Despite surveillance, without his knowledge, for six months prior to [the incident that led to his dismissal] no wrongdoing, negligence or irregularity on his part was discovered. [...] The Director-General has failed to take into consideration the above material facts and has erred in treating the complainant as guilty of a 'cover-up'. The refusal of reinstatement was thus not a proper exercise of whatever discretion he had in the matter."
Keywords:
complainant; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; limits; mistake of fact; negligence; organisation; organisation's interest; performance report; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Judgment 1234
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
The complainant, an official at grade D.2, was moved twice in 18 months but given no explanation for the moves. His second transfer was to a post at a lower grade, some distance from headquarters and in a field he had never worked in. "Although the Director-General will ordinarily be treated as the best judge of what the organization's interests are and the Tribunal will not ordinarily interfere in his assessment of them, nevertheless it will do so in this case. It is quite inadequate to plead that the decision to transfer the complainant was 'in the interests of the organization'. The basis for reaching that conclusion must be made clear so that the Tribunal may exercise its power of review and determine whether there exists any of the grounds for setting aside a discretionary decision of that kind."
Keywords:
discretion; downgrading; duty to substantiate decision; grade; judicial review; limits; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; transfer;
Consideration 19
Extract:
The complainant, an official at grade D.2, was moved twice in 18 months but given no explanation for the transfers. His second move was to a post at a lower grade, at some distance from headquarters and in a field he had never worked in. The organization pleads that his transfer was "in the interests of the organization" and that the burden is on him to show that it was not. "But there it betrays a deeply mistaken view of its duty. Of course its own interests are paramount, but it must still, for the sake of proper management and mutual confidence, treat its staff fairly. If it is transferring a staff member it must let him have a degree of responsibility corresponding to his grade and respect his dignity. It must give him a statement of the reasons for the transfer and the opportunity of responding."
Keywords:
burden of proof; downgrading; duty to substantiate decision; grade; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; respect for dignity; right to reply; staff member's interest; transfer;
Judgment 1231
74th Session, 1993
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 23
Extract:
The complainant seeks the quashing of a decision to dismiss him following the abolition of his post. The only grounds given for his dismissal are "just a broad allusion to the organization's 'service requirements' or 'interests'. Such terms are meaningless unless there is a fuller explanation enabling the staff member and, if need be, the Tribunal to grasp the actual reasons, especially where the outcome is as drastic as abolition of post and dismissal."
Keywords:
abolition of post; decision; duty to substantiate decision; judicial review; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; purport; staff member's interest; termination of employment;
Considerations 31 to 33
Extract:
A new post to which the complainant had been assigned was then abolished. The facts "lend weight to the complainant's view that 'shunting' him - as he puts it - into an empty administrative post was just a start to removing him. What bears out the foregoing is that apart from the broad allusion to 'interests' the impugned decisions disclose no consistent idea of reform warranting the creation of the post [in question] in 1989 or the abolition of it in 1991. There is no discerning in what happened anything but a series of makeshift measures taken - at heavy cost to the organization's coffers - to dispose of the case of an official Interpol wanted to discharge in disregard of due forms and process. To that extent there is a parallel in law with a case the Tribunal deplored in Judgment 807 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 807
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; case law; creation of post; judicial review; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; post held by the complainant; refusal to assign work;
Judgment 1226
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3, 7 and 8
Extract:
The complainants challenge decisions by the Director-General confirming the abolition of free after-service medical cover. They allege breach of acquired rights and contend that the FAO's financial position did not warrant such measures. "The Tribunal will not compare the options open to the FAO in the area of financial policy since it might ignore the realities that the FAO has to take into account. All the Tribunal need do is acknowledge that it was because of the financial plight of the scheme and its own that the organization decided to do away with free coverage for pensioners. The change does cause the complainants detriment. [...] But that alone does not amount to breach of any acquired right. First, the effect of the change was to put all fao pensioners on a par. [...] Secondly, there were transitional measures to lighten the impact of the change [...]. Since the change was made by way of rules, and because of the reasons for it, the complainants have suffered no breach of any acquired right despite the injury to their interests."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; budgetary reasons; discretion; grounds; health insurance; insurance; judicial review; limits; medical expenses; organisation's interest; social benefits; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1223
74th Session, 1993
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
"True, a staff member may not assert any right to promotion and the choice of the successful applicant is at the discretion of the administration, which alone may appraise the organisation's interests. Yet the exercise of discretion is subject to restrictions in law and the Tribunal will to that extent review the decision: see for example Judgment 1016 [...]. So the staff member has undeniably the right to file an internal appeal or a complaint with the Tribunal if he believes that the appointment to a vacancy he has applied for is improper."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; cause of action; competition; complaint; discretion; internal candidate; judicial review; limits; organisation's interest; promotion; receivability of the complaint; refusal; right; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1221
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant seeks the redefinition of her duties and, subsidiarily, transfer or secondment. "The administration never forced the complainant to perform duties other than those in the description of her post. It is bound neither to amend the duties of staff to suit their own wishes nor [...] to grant their applications for transfer, provided that its decisions are not prompted by considerations irrelevant to its own interests."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; assignment; discretion; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; post description; request by a party; request for transfer; secondment;
Judgment 1217
74th Session, 1993
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant objects to CERN's refusal to change his home from that of which he is a citizen to another country. "The original determination of the home station on recruitment and any later change are incontrovertibly at the discretion of CERN, which has to give weight to the various criteria the Staff Regulations set. For the sake of sound management [...] the organization may set guidelines on the matter. So there can be no objection to its consistent policy of determining the staff member's home, barring evidence to the contrary, in his own country and allowing later change to some other country only where some change in circumstances so warrants."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; criteria; decision; discretion; home; home leave; judicial review; nationality; organisation's interest; place of origin; refusal;
Judgment 1207
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"A distinction must be drawn between the upgrading of the complainant's post and his own promotion. Any regrading is bound to affect an organisation's structure and will therefore depend on the way in which work is organised. [...]
The fact that pending the outcome he was fulfilling duties pertaining to a more highly graded post that did not yet exist does not entitle him to compensation, let alone retroactive promotion. [...]"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 940, 1016, 1025
Keywords:
administrative delay; date; effective date; organisation's interest; personal promotion; post; post classification; promotion;
Judgment 1143
72nd Session, 1992
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
The complainant applied for extension of the age limit on the grounds that without it her pension would be paltry and that her continued service would be in the organization's interest. The Director General rejected her request, relying on Judgment 358 [...], which he said precluded his acting in the exclusive interests of the staff member, and on the fact that Staff Regulation 9.8 prevented him from making an exception to the age-limit rule to take account of an official's financial situation. The Tribunal holds that "in stating his decision in those terms the Director General mistook the scope of his discretion and the ratio of Judgment 358: he may not refuse to exercise his discretion just because he is being asked to take a staff member's financial situation into account." Moreover, her performance reports were good. "The Director General erred in law because his decision was not in accordance with Regulation 9.8(a). He could have taken into account the complainant's financial situation provided that that was not the exclusive factor and that the interests of the Organization were also taken into account."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WIPO STAFF REGULATION 9.8
ILOAT Judgment(s): 358
Keywords:
age limit; exception; organisation's interest; pension; retirement;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Regulation 9.8 confers on the Director General discretion to extend the age limit in individual cases if he considers that to be in the organization's interests. The determination of what the organization's interests are being peculiarly within the Director General's discretion, the Tribunal has a limited power of review and will interfere with his decision only if it was taken without authority or [...]."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WIPO STAFF REGULATION 9.8
Keywords:
age limit; discretion; exception; extension beyond retirement age; judicial review; organisation's interest; retirement;
Judgment 1129
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"There will indeed be misuse of authority where an administration acts for reasons that are extraneous to the organisation's best interests and seeks some objective other than those which the authority vested in it is intended to serve." There is no evidence that the organization, which followed the prescribed procedure and did its utmost to find another post for the complainant, dismissed him for reasons other than those linked to the financial crisis it was facing.
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; budgetary reasons; definition; grounds; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; procedure before the tribunal; reassignment; termination of employment;
Judgment 1128
71st Session, 1991
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
As stated in Judgment 675, "an international organisation is under an obligation to consider whether or not it is in its interests to renew a contract and to make a decision accordingly: though such a decision is discretionary, it may not 'be arbitrary or irrational'; there 'must be a good reason for it and the reason must be given'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 675
Keywords:
contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; limits; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; organisation's interest;
Judgment 1076
70th Session, 1991
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3 and 7
Extract:
The complainant's application for transfer was refused. "Being discretionary, the decision may be set aside only if it was taken without authority [...]. The Tribunal will not quash a decision simply because the parties' respective interests might have been differently assessed."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; organisation; organisation's interest; refusal; request for transfer; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1055
70th Session, 1991
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
WHO Staff Rule 565.2 reads: "A staff member may be reassigned whenever it is in the interest of the organization to do so". The Rule reflects a general principle stated in Judgment 810. Yet the Director-General's authority in the matter is not absolute. The Tribunal will determine whether there is a formal or procedural flaw, etc. It will also consider whether there has been breach of good faith.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF RULE 565.2
ILOAT Judgment(s): 810
Keywords:
discretion; good faith; judicial review; organisation's interest; transfer;
Judgment 1050
69th Session, 1990
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The greater caution must be shown in interfering with a [transfer] decision which is founded solely on the organization's interests because the Director-General must ordinarily be deemed to be the best judge of what they are."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; organisation's interest; transfer;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"But Regulation 4.2 provides that the purpose of transfer is to secure 'the highest standards of efficiency, competence and integrity'. In acting in pursuance of that purpose the Director-General is not precluded from transferring a staff member provided that his intention is, as Regulation 1.1 requires, to serve the organization's interests and that the staff member's own abilities and interests are not overlooked. Where the Director-General believes that the organization's interests must prevail he will act accordingly and the staff member will ordinarily have to fall in line unless he prefers resignation."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF REGULATIONS 1.1 AND 4.2
Keywords:
discretion; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; purpose; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; transfer;
Judgment 1018
69th Session, 1990
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"It is the duty of the head of any international organisation to take whatever measures can reduce tensions among his staff, bring about good working relations and improve efficiency. that is one of the factors he may take into account when considering transfers, and the Tribunal will be slow to interfere with such exercise of his discretion especially if, as is the case here, the transfer causes no injury to the employee transferred."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; lack of injury; organisation's interest; transfer; working relations;
Judgment 987
68th Session, 1990
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The reason given for terminating the complainant's appointment [before the expiry of the probation period] was his unsatisfactory performance and termination on such grounds may be deemed to be action in the organization's interests. The Director-General having wide discretion in the matter, the Tribunal will quash the decision only if it was taken without authority, [etc]".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; organisation's interest; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 956
66th Session, 1989
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The case law says that when authorised to refuse, without notice or compensation, to renew such an appointment the Director-General has discretion which he exercises subject to an implied requirement of respect for the demands of efficient administration and for the organization's interests. The rule consistently applied is that, short of replacing the Director-General's appraisal of the evidence with its own, the Tribunal will set aside a decision not to renew that was taken without authority [...]".
Keywords:
contract; discretion; fixed-term; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; organisation's interest;
Judgment 954
66th Session, 1989
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The Tribunal "holds that the abolition of his post and the termination of his appointment [...] were needed in the organization's interests and did not amount to any abuse of authority."
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; termination of employment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >
|
