Successor (75,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Successor
Total judgments found: 12

• Judgment 4653

  
  136th Session, 2023
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant filed two complaints to challenge his performance evaluation for 2015 and a decision to deny his request for protection against retaliation.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; death; successor;
  

  Considerations 3, 4 & 6

  Extract:

  WIPO informed the Tribunal that the complainant had passed away on 2 March 2020. The Organization also informed the Tribunal that two family members were mentioned in the complainant’s personal file, namely his wife and a daughter, and it provided the latter’s contact details.
  Any person on whom the official’s rights have devolved on her or his death has the right to initiate or pursue a complaint before the Tribunal on the basis of Article II, paragraph 6, of its Statute. In the present case, as no such person came forward seeking to exercise that right, the Registrar of the Tribunal contacted the complainant’s daughter by email on 23 November 2022 in order to discuss how to proceed with the two pending cases. In response, the complainant’s daughter only asked to be provided with a copy of any judgment that might be rendered by the Tribunal on the complaints filed by her father. No further steps have been taken by her or any other person to whom the complainant’s rights have devolved on his death on the basis of [...] Article II, paragraph 6, of the Statute.
  [...]
  In the circumstances [...], having regard to the subject matter of the disputes, the present absence in the proceedings of a person to whom the complainant’s rights have devolved on his death and the interest of the Tribunal in bringing these cases to a close, the Tribunal will make orders balancing these considerations.

  Keywords:

  death; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3642

  
  122nd Session, 2016
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants challenge the lawfulness of the procedure followed to fill an Administrative Assistant position.

  Considerations 9-12

  Extract:

  The jurisprudence of the Tribunal on the standing of elected staff representatives to take proceedings before the Tribunal in a case such as the present is not uniformly clear. Recently in Judgment 3557, consideration 3, the Tribunal indicated that in certain circumstances staff representatives may challenge the appointment of another official, but can only do so if they allege breach of their own individual rights. In another recent case, Judgment 3546, the Tribunal concluded it was unnecessary to consider whether a staff representative had standing generally to challenge the extension of the appointment of another official because the complainant, who was a staff representative, had had a right to be advised of the proposal to extend the appointment and that right had been allegedly violated. That was viewed as sufficient to give the complainant standing.
  On the other hand, the right of a staff representative to file a complaint challenging the appointment of an official has been recognised as an aspect of the right of an elected staff representative to bring proceedings on behalf of a staff committee with a view to preserving common rights and interests of staff (see Judgment 2791, consideration 2, and Judgment 2755, consideration 6).
  However ultimately, the Tribunal’s jurisdiction and the related question of a person’s right to invoke that jurisdiction should be determined by reference to the Tribunal’s Statute. Article II addresses both questions. The Tribunal is conferred with jurisdiction to hear complaints alleging non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of officials of the International Labour Office and other organisations which have submitted to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction, as well as complaints alleging non-observance of such provisions of the relevant Staff Regulations as are applicable to the case. Having identified and defined the jurisdiction, Article II identifies in paragraph 6, the class or classes of people who can invoke that jurisdiction. That paragraph provides that “[t]he Tribunal shall be open […] to the official” and to any person to whom the “official’s rights have devolved” on death together with any other person entitled to some right of a deceased official. A legal normative document conferring jurisdiction on a court should not be narrowly construed. However there is little room to doubt that the expression “shall be open to the official” is a reference to the official whose terms of appointment have allegedly not been observed or, in relation to whose circumstances (in “a case”), applicable provisions of the Staff Regulations have allegedly not been observed. This is reinforced by the reference to “the official’s rights”, in the singular, in relation to rights that have devolved on death. That is to say, standing is directed to the vindication or enforcement of the rights of an individual officer. The clause does not cast the net any wider in relation to who can invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
  Similarly in Article VIII, dealing with remedies, the focus of the Article is the provision of relief or a remedy to an individual complainant on the assumption that the relief or remedy will overcome the effect or consequences on that complainant of the non-observance by either undoing the effect of the defendant organisation’s conduct (by rescission) or the payment of compensation to the complainant.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2755, 2791, 3546, 3557
  

  Keywords:

  locus standi; staff representative; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3213

  
  115th Session, 2013
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to grant her a survivor's pension for her dead husband.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; successor; survivor's benefit;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1752

  
  85th Session, 1998
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  The complainant's wife, who was a member of the staff of the International Labour Office committed suicide. Among other things, the complainant seeks awards of damages for the moral injury suffered by his wife as well as by his son and himself. "[The complainant] has access to the Tribunal under Article II(6) of its Statute only as the successor to any rights his wife may have had, since she alone was an official of the ILO. He may claim damages only for moral injury he says she suffered in its employ because of its failure to treat her with due care or for whatever other reason."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II(6) OF THE STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  injury; locus standi; moral injury; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; respect for dignity; status of complainant; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1125

  
  71st Session, 1991
  Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 2

  Extract:

  The complainant wants the Organisation to continue making contributions into a savings fund for the benefit of her heirs after the date of her retirement. "[H]er own lack of financial entitlement does not bar her from asking the Tribunal to enforce a provision of the material regulations."

  Keywords:

  cause of action; competence of tribunal; complainant; receivability of the complaint; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 661

  
  56th Session, 1985
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 1

  Extract:

  According to Article II[6] of the Statute of the Tribunal, the Tribunal is open to four categories of complainants: "[1] present officials, [2] former officials, [3] the successors of a deceased official, and [4] those who have some right under the terms of appointment of a deceased official or under some provision of the Staff Regulations on which he could rely."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 6, OF THE STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; iloat statute; locus standi; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 394

  
  43rd Session, 1980
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations

  Extract:

  The complainant, the brother of a deceased official, was not himself a member of the organization. "Nor is it proved that he was a person to whom the official's right devolved on his death, nor that he might derive rights from the contract of employment of the deceased, nor from the provisions of the staff regulations. Hence, in view of Article II, paragraph 6, of the Statute of the Tribunal, he has no locus standi and his complaints must [...] be dismissed."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 6, OF THE STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  family relationship; locus standi; ratione personae; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 388

  
  43rd Session, 1980
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  "The complainant died [...] after the complaint had been filed. His heirs have stated that they wish to pursue the proceedings in his place. The present judgment will therefore take effect for their benefit." The heirs are his wife, his infant children and the children by his first marriage.

  Keywords:

  case pending; complainant; consequence; death; effect; judgment of the tribunal; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 378

  
  42nd Session, 1979
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Preamble; second paragraph

  Extract:

  The complainant died in an accident after filing suit. His family wished to pursue the proceedings and not withdraw suit.

  Keywords:

  case pending; complainant; consequence; death; ratione personae; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 81

  
  14th Session, 1965
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  As for the complainant's rights under Article II, paragraph 6(b), of the Statute of the Tribunal, the provision "establishes a close link between the rights of the deceased official and the persons which it is designed to cover. However, such persons could not claim a right under a contractual or a statutory clause which the official was not entitled to invoke. Moreover, neither are they entitled to contest the validity of clauses which the official was called upon to respect."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 6(B), OF THE STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  complainant; limits; locus standi; right; successor;
  

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  "The complainant is attempting to deduce rights from clauses to which her husband could not have had recourse [...] the decisions relating to the application of the new pensions scheme were not contested by [the person concerned] within the period of 90 days prescribed by Article VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal, and these decisions, which thus became final in regard to [the person concerned], had the effect of irrevocably altering, before the date of his death, both the terms of his contract of appointment and the provisions of the regulations applicable in his case" - the person concerned could not, immediately before his death, have invoked in his favour the regulations in question. Nor is the complainant entitled to do so now.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  complaint; enforcement; receivability of the complaint; successor; time bar; time limit;
  

  Consideration 2

  Extract:

  The aim of the complaint is to contest, not that the regulations in force at the time of the death were correctly applied, but the validity of the bases on which the amount of the widow's pension was calculated resulting from the application of the new pension arrangement. In the opinion of the complainant, the new arrangement adversely affected the balance of contracted obligations of her husband and infringed the essential terms in consideration of which he had accepted appointment. The validity of the applicable statutory provisions is thus questioned as regards terms of appointment and the legality of the decision which made these provisions applicable in his particular case.

  Keywords:

  acquired right; amendment to the rules; amount; pension; pension entitlements; staff regulations and rules; successor; survivor's benefit; terms of appointment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 46

  
  8th Session, 1960
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  The complainant, "who is neither an official nor a former official of [the organization] and whose wife, a former official of the organization, is not deceased, is not qualified to institute proceedings before the Tribunal" under the terms of [Article II, paragraph 6, of the Statute of the Tribunal].

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 6, OF THE STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; locus standi; non official; ratione personae; status of complainant; successor;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 7

  
  1st Session, 1947
  International Institute of Intellectual Co-operation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 1

  Extract:

  "[T]he intervention of the Complainant exercising the right of her deceased husband and acting as legal guardian of his children must be understood as constituting also a Complaint to the Tribunal for the purpose of obtaining the settlement of her rights under these heads".

  Keywords:

  intervention; successor;