Status of complainant (57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 643, 682, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Status of complainant
Total judgments found: 103
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | next >
Judgment 4458
133rd Session, 2022
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the setting aside of the information circular which, according to her, announced the closure of the UNESCO Commissary.
Consideration 6
Extract:
[T]he contested measure affects the complainant not in her capacity as a former official of UNESCO, but in her – legally distinct – capacity as a member of the Commissary. The complainant herself makes this clear in her complaint by submitting that the decision to end the Commissary’s activity “directly breaches [her] entitlements as a member of the Commissary”, and the nature of the arguments raised in her submissions confirms that she intends to file a complaint with the Tribunal in that capacity.
However, the opportunity to use the services of the Commissary, which was merely a facility offered to UNESCO staff members – and indeed to other categories of persons [...] – was not covered by the provisions of the complainant’s employment contract when she retired nor by the provisions of the Organization’s Staff Regulations [...].
Keywords:
competence; facilities; locus standi; ratione materiae; status of complainant;
Judgment 4103
127th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to grant him mission status during the first six months of his assignment to a field post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; status of complainant;
Judgment 4097
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decisions to end her participation in the reassignment process and to terminate her fixed-term appointment further to the abolition of her post.
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant refers in her pleas to the Tribunal’s judgments which emphasise the need for an organization to apply rules concerning the abolition of posts and the reassignment of staff with considerable generosity towards the affected staff members (see, for example, Judgments 133 and 388). While these and many other judgments of the Tribunal concerned permanent staff, they were judgments given at a time when the preponderance of staff in international organizations were permanent staff. There is, presently, a greater mix of staff of differing status in international organizations. However, simply because some staff are not permanent, it does not follow that those other classes of staff of differing status should be afforded no protection by principles developed by the Tribunal in circumstances where their post is abolished and attempts are being made to reassign them.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 133, 388
Keywords:
abolition of post; analogy; organisation's duties; reassignment; status of complainant;
Judgment 3737
123rd Session, 2017
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant alleges that he was subjected to harassment.
Consideration 4
Extract:
[T]he ITU contends that the first complaint is irreceivable to the same extent on the grounds that the complainant, contrary to Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal, did not exhaust all the internal remedies provided for in Chapter XI of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. However, as the Tribunal has previously ruled, these remedies were not open to former ITU officials under the provisions that were in force at the material time (see Judgments 2892, under 6 to 8, 3139, under 3, or 3178, under 5). The complainant was therefore entitled to come directly before the Tribunal and, contrary to the ITU’s submissions, the fact that he nevertheless filed a request for review of the decision of 13 March 2014 did not oblige him to pursue the resulting internal appeal proceedings until their completion, since he had already left the ITU’s employ on the date when he was notified of that decision (see Judgment 2892 cited above and, a contrario, Judgments 3202, under 10, and 3423, under 7b)).
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2892, 3139, 3178, 3202, 3423
Keywords:
direct appeal to tribunal; exception; internal remedies exhausted; status of complainant;
Judgment 3653
122nd Session, 2016
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions not to appoint him to a post, not to renew his contract, not to compensate him for “extra-contractual” work and not to compensate him on account of defamation by his former supervisor and for exposure to asbestos.
Consideration 4
Extract:
There is [...] no provision under which the Tribunal is competent to hear the claim concerning the complainant’s non-selection for the post [...]. As he was not selected for the post, he did not become a WFP staff member from that application and therefore obtained no right to lodge an internal appeal under Staff Regulation 301.11.1 to challenge the non-selection. Because of his non-selection, he had not entered into a contractual relationship with the WFP. Accordingly, by virtue of Article II, paragraph 5, of the Tribunal’s Statute, he has no standing to bring a claim before the Tribunal alleging the non-observance of the terms and conditions of an appointment which he did not have. This position was explained in Judgment 1509, consideration 16 [...].
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1509
Keywords:
candidate; external candidate; locus standi; non official; ratione personae; status of complainant;
Judgment 3623
121st Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to assign him to non-active status and to replace his invalidity pension by an invalidity allowance.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; disability benefit; status of complainant;
Judgment 3551
120th Session, 2015
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: As the complaint is clearly irreceivable, it is summarily dismissed.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; status of complainant; summary procedure;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The Tribunal clearly has no jurisdiction to hear this complaint. Pursuant to Article II, paragraph 5, of its Statute, “[t]he Tribunal shall […] be competent to hear complaints alleging non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of officials”. The complainant stated in the complaint form that he filed the complaint in his capacity as a former official. However, according the express terms of the SSA under which he was employed, the complainant did not have the status of a WHO official. As the complainant cannot be considered as an official or former official of WHO and is not covered by WHO’s Staff Rules and Regulations, he has no access to this Tribunal (see Judgments 1034, under 3, and 3049, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1034, 3049
Keywords:
competence; non official; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; special service agreement; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
Judgment 3550
120th Session, 2015
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: As the complainant is not an official of the Organization, the complaint is summarily dismissed.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; status of complainant; summary procedure;
Judgment 3549
120th Session, 2015
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: As the complaint is clearly irreceivable, it is summarily dismissed.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; status of complainant; summary procedure;
Judgment 3468
119th Session, 2015
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: As the complaint does not raise issues over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction, it is irreceivable and is summarily dismissed.
Consideration 4
Extract:
"[I]t is clear that these issues concerned the application of a policy to the complainant while he was seeking consultancy work with the FAO but when he was no longer an official of the Organization. The policy had no practical or legal application to the complainant when he was an official of the FAO. Accordingly the issues sought to be raised by the complainant in his internal appeal and before the Tribunal are not issues concerning the non-observance of the terms of his appointment as an official of the FAO or of the application of the Staff Regulations applicable to him during his period of employment with that Organization. The complainant’s challenge is made as a potential consultant rather than as a former official. Consequently, his complaint is based on his status as a potential consultant. Having regard to Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute, the complaint does not raise issues over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; former official; non official; ratione personae; status of complainant;
Judgment 3453
119th Session, 2015
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal summarily dismissed the complaint as clearly irreceivable.
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Pursuant to Article II, paragraph 5, of its Statute, the Tribunal is competent to hear complaints alleging “non observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of officials and of the provisions of the Staff Regulations”. In this case, the Tribunal finds that the complainant, who asserts that he is acting as chairperson of the “Committee monitoring the payment of War Rehabilitation Grants”, does not allege any breach of his terms of appointment or of the Staff Regulations applicable to him. His complaint, which does not fall within the competence of the Tribunal, is therefore clearly irreceivable [...]."
Keywords:
cause of action; status of complainant;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
cause of action; complaint dismissed; status of complainant; summary procedure;
Judgment 3424
119th Session, 2015
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that the impugned implied decision was flawed.
Consideration 6(a)
Extract:
"It is true that, contrary to the Fund’s submissions, its former employees do not have access to the internal appeal procedure for which the applicable regulations make provision. Indeed, the regulations in force at the material time, as well as those which replaced them with effect from 1 August 2012, provide that the internal means of redress are open to “employees”, but there is nothing in the texts governing the organisation’s staff which specifies that this term also refers to former employees. The Tribunal has already had occasion to find, with regard to other international organisations’ staff rules and regulations couched in similar language, that in the absence of any indication to the contrary in the applicable texts, this term must be interpreted as referring solely to serving staff members (see, in particular, Judgments 2840, under 17 to 21, 2892, under 6 to 8, or 3074, under 11 to 13). The Fund’s argument that, in practice, the Appeal Board has so far agreed to consider appeals filed by former employees is no bar to the application of that case law."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2840, 2892, 3074
Keywords:
exception; former official; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; status of complainant;
Judgment 3423
119th Session, 2015
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that the impugned implied decision was flawed.
Consideration 7(a)
Extract:
"It is true that [the Fund's] former employees do not have access to the internal appeal procedure for which the applicable regulations make provision. Indeed, the regulations in force at the material time [...] provide that the internal means of redress are open to “employees”, but there is nothing in the texts governing the organisation’s staff which specifies that this term also refers to former employees. The Tribunal has already had occasion to find, with regard to other international organisations’ staff rules and regulations couched in similar language, that in the absence of any indication to the contrary in the applicable texts, this term must be interpreted as referring solely to serving staff members (see, in particular, Judgments 2840, under 17 to 21, 2892, under 6 to 8, or 3074, under 11 to 13)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2840, 2892, 3074
Keywords:
exception; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; status of complainant;
Judgment 3420
119th Session, 2015
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision not to convert his consultant's contract into a fixed-term appointment.
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The Tribunal has examined its competence ratione personae of its own motion since, when the complaint was filed [...], the complainant was formally described in his employment contract as a “consultant”, a term often used for external collaborators. In the complaint form, the complainant calls himself a staff member. The Tribunal notes that the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules applicable since 1 January 2012 use the terms “staff members” and “staff” indiscriminately and that WIPO describes the complainant as a temporary employee on a short-term contract. The Tribunal finds that WIPO has consistently treated the complainant as a staff member. It is clear from the evidence that his contract provided for the payment of a salary, that he was subject to the disciplinary procedure – which was actually applied to him – and that he had access to internal appeal bodies. Moreover, WIPO admits that it has outsourced duties previously exercised by the complainant, which clearly shows that they were previously regarded as being performed internally. The Tribunal is therefore competent ratione personae to hear this case. Indeed, it had already implicitly accepted that it was competent to hear the complainant’s previous complaints."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; locus standi; official; ratione personae; short-term; staff member; status of complainant;
Judgment 3411
119th Session, 2015
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants successfully impugn the decision not to extend their contracts upon expiry.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
status of complainant; transfer;
Judgment 3383
118th Session, 2014
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: As the complainant has never been an official of CERN and did not impugn a decision affecting his rights, his complaint is summarily dismissed.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; non official; official; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; summary procedure;
Judgment 3382
118th Session, 2014
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complaint filed by an unsuccessful external candidate for employment was summarily dismissed as being not within the scope of the Tribunal’s competence.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
candidate; complaint dismissed; external candidate; non official; official; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; summary procedure;
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 3298
116th Session, 2014
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants contest the conditions of their reassignment and allege unequal treatment.
Consideration 24
Extract:
"[B]y denying the complainants the status of non-locally recruited officials, whereas that status was granted to three officials reassigned to Addis Ababa in the same circumstances, the [Organization] breached the principle of equal treatment."
Keywords:
breach; equal treatment; reassignment; status of complainant;
Judgment 3281
116th Session, 2014
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Tax refunds due as a result of tax credits.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; domestic law; member state; organisation's duties; payment; reckoning; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; tax;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | next >
|
