Official (704,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Official
Total judgments found: 175

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >

• Judgment 2626

  
  103rd Session, 2007
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5(c)

  Extract:

  "Generally speaking, serving or retired staff members who turn to an internal appeal body are entitled to have their case heard within a reasonable period of time without having to endure excessive and unjustified delays resulting from the malfunctioning of that body, or from the inadequate resources at its disposal. This duty to take prompt action is reinforced where the dispute is such that it must be resolved rapidly if resolution is to serve any purpose. [...] Contrary to the defendant's view, the complainant therefore had good reason to consider that the lack of a decision within a reasonable time amounted to an implied decision of rejection which he was entitled to challenge before the Tribunal (see Judgments 499 and 791, under 2)."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 499, 791
  

  Keywords:

  absence of final decision; administrative delay; competence of tribunal; complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; implied decision; injury; internal appeal; internal appeals body; official; organisation's duties; reasonable time; retirement; right;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2619

  
  103rd Session, 2007
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  "The decision to grant special leave must be made on a case-by-case basis. It is not possible to assume that, because special leave has been granted to one staff member, it must be granted to all, unless all cases are identical in fact and in law. [...] Discrimination cannot be established until it is proved that staff members in identical situations were treated differently."

  Keywords:

  breach; difference; discretion; equal treatment; evidence; exception; official; organisation's duties; same; special leave;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2610

  
  102nd Session, 2007
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "While it is highly desirable that staff representatives should be allowed to participate in operations to determine their colleagues' remuneration, this can in no way affect the right of each staff member to avail himself or herself of the means of redress which are open to him or her and which constitute a fundamental safeguard for international civil servants. The ICSC is therefore mistaken in believing that it can rely on the theory of estoppel vis-à-vis the complainants by arguing that staff representatives are supposed to act on behalf of all the members of the personnel and that 'their actions should be considered as legally attributable to each and every one of the staff they represent'."

  Keywords:

  adjustment; general principle; icsc decision; internal appeal; official; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; safeguard; salary; scale; staff representative;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2593

  
  102nd Session, 2007
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  "Just as entitlement to sick leave terminates on the date of termination of an official's appointment, it is suspended during the period when the official is on special leave without salary."

  Keywords:

  date; official; period; right; separation from service; sick leave; special leave; unpaid leave;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2585

  
  102nd Session, 2007
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  "While it is true, as the Tribunal recalled in Judgment 2156, that 'elected representatives of the staff enjoy specific rights and safeguards in accordance with the general principles which govern employment relationships in international organisations and which are also generally recognised in national labour legislation', it is still up to the staff member complaining that such specific rights and safeguards have been violated to prove that fact and not merely rely on bald assertions."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2156
  

  Keywords:

  breach; burden of proof; case law; collective rights; domestic law; general principle; iloat; official; organisation; request by a party; right; safeguard; staff representative; working relations;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2562

  
  101st Session, 2006
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  "[T]he Tribunal has consistently held that individual members of the Staff Committee must have the power to file suit as representatives of that body (Judgments 1147, 1269, 1315, 2036). The rationale is that if the Staff Committee is not able to file suit, the only way to preserve common rights and interests of staff is to allow individual officials to act as representatives (see Judgment 1315, under 8, referring to Judgment 1269, under 13)."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1147, 1269, 1315, 2036
  

  Keywords:

  case law; collective rights; grounds; official; right of appeal; staff member's interest; staff representative; staff union;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  "The Tribunal's case law has determined that the head of an international organisation has the 'executive authority to assign staff to different posts' (Judgment 534), and 'is empowered to change the duties assigned to his subordinates' (Judgment 265)."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 265, 534
  

  Keywords:

  amendment to the rules; assignment; case law; discretion; executive head; iloat; official; organisation; post; supervisor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2558

  
  101st Session, 2006
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4(a)

  Extract:

  According to the complainant, the decision to extend her probationary period is unlawful because it was not taken by the President of the Office. "It is for the Organisation to prove that whoever decides to extend an official's probationary period, or to dismiss the official, is authorised to take that decision, either by virtue of a statutory provision, or by virtue of a lawful delegation by the person in whom such authority is vested under that provision (see Judgment 2028, under 8, third paragraph, and 11). [...] In the absence of any formal delegation by the President, the Tribunal concludes that the complainant's plea that the decision to extend her probationary period was taken ultra vires is well founded. This flaw will not lead it to set aside the decision in question, but it does justify compensating the complainant for any moral injury the flaw may have caused her."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2028
  

  Keywords:

  allowance; burden of proof; competence; consequence; decision; decision-maker; delegated authority; executive head; extension of contract; flaw; iloat; lack of evidence; moral injury; official; organisation's duties; probationary period; provision; refusal; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2553

  
  101st Session, 2006
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 5-6

  Extract:

  Harassment is described in IAEA staff notice SEC/NOT/1922 as follows:
  "Harassment is any conduct or comment made by a staff member or group of staff members on either a one-time or continuous basis that demeans, belittles or causes personal humiliation. It can take many different forms, including, for example: threatening comments, whether oral or written, or threatening physical behaviour; intimidation, blackmail or coercion; making deliberate insults related to a person's personal or professional competence; humiliating, degrading or making offensive or abusive personal remarks to someone; undermining or isolating people; or making it impossible for staff to do their job by, for example, withholding information."
  "This is a very broad definition, no doubt designedly so. It requires reasonable interpretation and application to the circumstances of each particular case. It contains both subjective and objective elements: did the alleged victim actually feel humiliated, offended or intimidated by the impugned conduct, and was such conduct, viewed objectively, of a nature reasonably to humiliate, offend or intimidate? Where the impugned conduct consists of words, although truth will not always constitute a complete defence, an inquiry as to whether such words may or may not reasonably be true is obviously relevant. Likewise, an inquiry as to whether the speaker's words can reasonably be seen as a reference to the performance of duties and are not merely gratuitous comments will be germane. Personal characteristics such as gender, race and ethnicity as well as the reasonableness of the sensitivities of the alleged victim, must also be weighed in considering both questions. Similarly, any previous history of relations between the alleged victim and the alleged offender may be relevant and, while a single injurious action may by itself be enough to constitute harassment, an otherwise apparently inoffensive comment may, with repetition, become a legitimate source of grievance.
  In the final analysis, the question as to whether any particular act or series of acts amounts to harassment is one of fact to be answered only after careful consideration of the above factors and an examination of all the surrounding circumstances."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: IAEA staff notice SEC/NOT/1922
  
  

  Keywords:

  breach; conduct; continuing breach; criteria; definition; difference; harassment; information note; interpretation; judicial review; moral injury; official; organisation's duties; purpose; qualifications; respect for dignity; sex discrimination; working relations; written rule;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2549

  
  101st Session, 2006
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 10, 11 and 13

  Extract:

  The complainant, a Danish national, was employed by the ILO from 3 January 2002 to 2 January 2005. She had entered into a registered partnership with her same-sex partner. On taking up her functions, she submitted a Certificate of Registered Partnership drawn up in accordance with the Danish Act on registered partnership and asked to be granted dependency benefits, designating her partner as her spouse. Her request was rejected. The Office stated that it was "in a position to recognise same-sex marriages immediately where the legislation of the country of the staff member's nationality recognises such marriages." It has in fact recently recognised such same-sex marriages where the national legislation defines same-sex marriages as spousal relationships.
  "The question is whether the broad interpretation of the term 'spouse' already given by the Office in the case of a marriage recognised by the legislation of the country of the staff member's nationality should have been extended to unions between same-sex partners which are not expressly designated as marriages under the national law of the staff member concerned. The Tribunal feels that a purely nominalistic approach to this issue would be excessively formalistic and is inappropriate in view of the fact that the situation varies from one country to another and that great care must be taken not to treat officials placed in comparable situations unequally: it is not because a country has opted for legislation that admits same-sex unions while refusing to describe them as marriages that officials who are nationals of that State should necessarily be denied certain rights. As pointed out in Judgment 1715 [...], there may be situations in which the status of spouse can be recognised in the absence of a marriage, provided that the staff member concerned can show the precise provisions of local law on which he or she relies. It is therefore necessary to determine whether in the present case the provisions of Danish law enable the complainant and her partner to be considered as 'spouses' in the meaning of the applicable regulations."
  After having examined the provisions of the Danish Act on registered partnership, the Tribunal finds that "the Director-General was wrong [...] to refuse to recognise the status of spouse for the complainant's partner [and orders] the ILO [to] give full effect to this ruling by granting the complainant the benefits denied to her during the time of her employment".

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1715
  

  Keywords:

  analogy; applicable law; burden of proof; condition; consequence; contract; declaration of recognition; definition; dependant; difference; domestic law; equal treatment; exception; executive head; family allowance; interpretation; judicial review; marital status; member state; nationality; official; provision; refusal; request by a party; right; same-sex marriage; social benefits; status of complainant;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2540

  
  101st Session, 2006
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 27

  Extract:

  "The Tribunal is obliged to note that it is a most serious breach of the rights of international civil servants to take retaliatory action simply because they have pursued an internal appeal. International civil servants - no matter how high their rank is - cannot protect their rights in national tribunals. Their only recourse is through the mechanisms established by the relevant Staff Rules. To punish a person because he or she has had resort to those mechanisms is a gross abuse of power warranting an award of substantial exemplary damages [...]."

  Keywords:

  abuse of power; amount; disciplinary measure; exemplary damages; hidden disciplinary measure; internal appeal; misuse of authority; municipal court; official; organisation's duties; right; right of appeal;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2533

  
  101st Session, 2006
  Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  The complainant suffered a workplace injury at the Organization premises. The results of this seemingly minor accident were catastrophic and the complainant is now permanently and totally disabled and suffers from a rare illness, which has extended up both of the complainant's legs and requires him to use a wheelchair.
  "It is common for a mature legal system to provide compensation on a 'no fault' basis to employees who suffer workplace injuries; the law of the international civil service can do no less."

  Keywords:

  applicable law; general principle; handicapped person; international civil service principles; invalidity; material damages; official; organisation's duties; professional accident; service-incurred;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2503

  
  100th Session, 2006
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  "The evidence on file shows that the complainant was never an official of Eurocontrol, and the only contracts he has produced are temporary contracts signed with a temporary employment agency [which supplied him to the defendant] and governed by French law. According to Article II of its Statute, the Tribunal is competent to hear complaints alleging non-observance of the terms of appointment of officials or such provisions of the Staff Regulations as are applicable to their case. Since the complainant is not an official of Eurocontrol, and cannot produce any employment contract signed with the latter, it follows, as the Agency rightly contends, that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over this dispute."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute
  
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; complainant; contract; domestic law; iloat statute; locus standi; non official; official; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; successive contracts;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2498

  
  100th Session, 2006
  European Organization for Nuclear Research
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4(b)

  Extract:

  "Staff members may at any time object to discriminatory treatment and request that the Organization put an end to it (see Judgment 978, under 20)."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 978
  

  Keywords:

  breach; equal treatment; official; request by a party; right;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2496

  
  100th Session, 2006
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "A decision as serious as one imposing a disciplinary measure will be lawful only provided that the rights of the staff members concerned to a fully adversarial procedure have been scrupulously respected. Charges must be precisely worded and notified sufficiently early to enable the staff member concerned to defend his case, particularly by establishing evidence and gathering testimonies which he believes are likely to refute the charges in the eyes of the disciplinary body and of the deciding authority, according to the nature of the charges against him."

  Keywords:

  adversarial proceedings; advisory body; condition; date of notification; decision; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; disclosure of evidence; executive head; official; organisation's duties; right; right to reply; testimony; time limit;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2490

  
  100th Session, 2006
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "[T]he executive head of an organisation has discretionary authority not only to promote someone from one grade to another but also to say what place he shall hold in his new grade (see Judgment 313, under 3)."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 313
  

  Keywords:

  discretion; executive head; grade; official; organisation; promotion;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2480

  
  100th Session, 2006
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 2 and 4

  Extract:

  The complainant takes issue with an ILO circular which concerned matrimonial property rights. It informed foreign nationals, like himself, who were married outside Switzerland with no marriage contract, that Switzerland was treating such persons as subject to the Swiss regime of joint ownership of property acquired after marriage (participation aux acquêts). He holds that by accepting such "instructions" from the Swiss Government, the Organization caused him undue financial hardship and "deep moral suffering". The Tribunal considers that the circular was "simply the transmission by the ILO to its staff members resident in Geneva of information received from the local 'Chambre des notaires'. [...] The publication by an international organisation for its staff members of purely objective information of this sort relating to local private law is manifestly not a matter falling within the Tribunal's field of competence."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ILO Circular No. 451, Series 6
  
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; domestic law; headquarters official; information note; marital status; material injury; moral injury; nationality; official; organisation; publication; written rule;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2475

  
  99th Session, 2005
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 20

  Extract:

  "It has been consistently held by the Tribunal that an employee of an international organisation has a right to be heard in disciplinary proceedings and, as said in Judgment 203, that 'right includes inter alia the opportunity to participate in the examination of the evidence'. As that judgment makes clear, that is so even 'in the absence of any explicit text'."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 203
  

  Keywords:

  adversarial proceedings; case law; disciplinary procedure; disclosure of evidence; no provision; official; organisation; right; right to reply;
  

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "[T]he obligations of an employer to act in good faith and to respect the dignity of its employees determine what is permissible. In particular, these considerations require that an investigation be conducted in a manner designed to ascertain all relevant facts without compromising the good name of the employee and that the employee be given an opportunity to test the evidence put against him or her and to answer the charge made."

  Keywords:

  appraisal of evidence; condition; good faith; inquiry; investigation; official; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; right to reply;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2468

  
  99th Session, 2005
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 16

  Extract:

  The complainant's appointment was terminated for unsatisfactory services. "The defendant is not wrong to point out that, except in a case of manifest error, the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment of a staff member's services for that of the competent bodies of an international organisation. Nevertheless, such an assessment must be made in full knowledge of the facts, and the considerations on which it is based must be accurate and properly established. The Tribunal, which pays considerable attention to these issues in the case of complaints concerning dismissal at the end of a probationary period or the non-renewal of fixed-term contracts on the grounds of unsatisfactory performance, must be even more vigilant where an organisation terminates the appointment of a staff member holding a contract without limit of time, which in principle should secure him against any risk of job loss or insecurity. This applies particularly in the present case, since the staff member concerned by the termination for unsatisfactory services received on the whole satisfactory or even excellent appraisals over a period of 15 years."

  Keywords:

  complaint; condition; contract; different appraisals; fixed-term; grounds; judicial review; mistake of fact; non-renewal of contract; official; organisation; period; permanent appointment; probationary period; satisfactory service; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
  

  Consideration 17

  Extract:

  "The procedures used to assess the performance of international civil servants must be both transparent and adversarial."

  Keywords:

  adversarial proceedings; official; organisation's duties; work appraisal;
  

  Considerations 18-19

  Extract:

  The complainant's appointment was terminated. "It may be concluded from all the circumstances of the case that, even though the complainant's conduct towards his supervisor was not what might be expected of an international civil servant and would probably have justified preventive action on the part of the Organization, the reasons given to establish that the complainant's abilities and performance were unsatisfactory did not suffice to justify terminating his appointment for unsatisfactory services.
  The complainant's [...] claim for retroactive reinstatement, with all legal consequences, within the Organization's staff [is well founded]."

  Keywords:

  complainant; conduct; consequence; insubordination; official; organisation's duties; qualifications; reinstatement; right; supervisor; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; working relations;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2461

  
  99th Session, 2005
  European Southern Observatory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 1-3

  Extract:

  ESO considers that the complainant's internal appeal is not receivable according to Article R VI 1.02 of the Staff Regulations since he is no longer a staff member.
  "The organisation is correct. The Staff Regulations do not give him any right of internal appeal. [...] The complainant alleges a contradiction between ESO's Staff Rules and Regulations [...] and Article VII(1) and (2) of the Tribunal's Statute. In fact, the language of the Tribunal's Statute does not specifically require the organisation to provide specific internal remedies, it only requires that those actually existing be exhausted."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: Article VII(1) and (2) of the Statute
  Organization rules reference: Article R VI 1.02 of ESO's Staff Regulations
  
  

  Keywords:

  iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; official; organisation; organisation's duties; provision; receivability of the complaint; right; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2456

  
  99th Session, 2005
  Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 9 and 11

  Extract:

  The complainant joined the Organisation in January 1998 under a fixed-term appointment. His contract, which was extended in 2003, was due to expire on 14 June 2004; it was not renewed due to the implementation of the seven-year tenure rule. He has produced before the Tribunal a document signed by the Director-General containing data about his performance, in which his date of entry on duty was incorrectly shown as 24 May 1997. He contends that the Director-General relied on that data in deciding not to renew his contract. "Since in the implementation of its policy the Organisation was said to be applying a 'first in, first out' rule, an error of over seven months in the calculation of any employee's length of service may be of critical importance. That is especially the case where such apparent error has the effect of indicating wrongly that the employee would at the time of his separation from the Organisation have served more than seven years. The Tribunal considers the alleged errors of fact to be material. [...] The non-renewal decision must be set aside and the Organisation shall be ordered to pay to the complainant the full balance of salary and benefits to which he would have been entitled if he had received a one-year extension of his contract to 14 June 2005. The complainant must account for any earnings from other employment during that period."

  Keywords:

  allowance; appointment; consequence; contract; date; decision; duration of appointment; enforcement; extension of contract; fixed-term; general principle; mistake of fact; non-renewal of contract; official; organisation's duties; period; reckoning; right; salary; staff member's duties; written rule;
  

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >