Investigation (860, 784, 898, 902, 903, 904, 906, 907, 913,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Investigation
Total judgments found: 172
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 4776
137th Session, 2024
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close his harassment complaint after a preliminary review.
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant seeks moral damages for reasons including the failure to carry out a formal investigation, the long duration of the preliminary investigation, the effect of the harassment and abuse of authority on his health, his professional career, reputation and personal life. This last-mentioned claim is based on the premise that he was the subject of harassment and abuse of authority. This is untested and unproved. As to the other aspects of his claim for moral damages, their foundation is simply asserted and not proved. This is insufficient (see, for example, Judgment 4644, consideration 7).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4644
Keywords:
investigation; moral damages;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; harassment; investigation; investigation report;
Judgment 4770
137th Session, 2024
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.
Consideration 6
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law, the cross-examination of witnesses is not a requirement for the lawfulness of the investigation and the disciplinary proceedings, provided that due process be ensured by other means. In the present case, the Tribunal is satisfied that due process was respected, despite the fact that the complainant had no opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. Indeed, he was informed of the precise allegations made against him and was provided with the verbatim records of the statements of the witnesses. He was thus able to confront and test the evidence, even though he was not present when the statements were made and was not able to cross-examine the witnesses who made them. Moreover, the investigation relied not only on the statements rendered by three witnesses, but also on documentary evidence.
Keywords:
disciplinary procedure; due process; investigation; witness;
Judgment 4764
137th Session, 2024
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to dismiss her for misconduct.
Consideration 7
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal said, in relation to both the opinion of an internal appeals body and an investigative body established by the rules of the organization concerned, in Judgment 4237, consideration 12:
“According to the Tribunal’s case law (see, for example, Judgments 3757, under 6, 4024, under 6, 4026, under 5, and 4091, under 17), ‘where an internal appeal body has heard evidence and made findings of fact, the Tribunal will only interfere if there is manifest error (see Judgment 3439, consideration 7)’. Moreover, where there is an investigation by an investigative body in disciplinary proceedings, ‘it is not the Tribunal’s role to reweigh the evidence collected by an investigative body the members of which, having directly met and heard the persons concerned or implicated, were able immediately to assess the reliability of their testimony. For that reason, reserve must be exercised before calling into question the findings of such a body and reviewing its assessment of the evidence. The Tribunal will interfere only in the case of manifest error (see Judgments 3682, under 8, and 3593, under 12)’ (see Judgment 3757, under 6).”
It is true that the [Global Board of Appeal] did not hear the witnesses in the present case. It did, however, review a large amount of documentary material, including the records of interviews, and made findings of fact based on this material. The opinion of the [Global Board of Appeal] is, on some relevant matters, balanced and considered and has to be given the deference spoken of in the Tribunal’s case law.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3593, 3682, 3757, 4237
Keywords:
disciplinary procedure; evidence; internal appeal; investigation;
Judgment 4756
137th Session, 2024
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to conduct an investigation into his allegation of breach of confidentiality and to deny his request for compensation.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; confidentiality; disclosure of evidence; investigation;
Judgment 4754
137th Session, 2024
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to close his harassment complaint.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; deference; harassment; investigation; investigative body; role of the tribunal;
Judgment 4753
137th Session, 2024
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to place on his personnel file a letter notifying him that he had committed serious misconduct for which he would have been summarily dismissed had he not separated from the IAEA, and to relevantly inform all affected individuals.
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant has not established that the investigation and findings of the OIOS in relation to the group complaint against him were legally flawed. Accordingly, there is no basis for concluding that the decision to place the letter of 17 December 2020 on the complainant’s personnel file was infected by legal error. Consequentially, there is no basis for ordering that the letter be removed from the complainant’s personnel file.
Keywords:
administrative decision; flaw; investigation; mistake of law; order; personal file;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
administrative decision; complaint dismissed; flaw; identical facts; investigation; joinder; personal file;
Consideration 8
Extract:
Ordinarily, a document addressing a staff member’s performance or conduct can, appropriately, be placed on the staff member’s personnel file. However, if the document is legally flawed, an order could be made requiring its removal (see, for example, Judgment 3997, consideration 8). In the present case, the letter of 17 December 2020 might arguably be legally flawed, if there was a flawed process of investigation.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3997
Keywords:
administrative decision; conduct; flaw; investigation; order; personal file;
Judgment 4746
137th Session, 2024
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close her harassment complaint following a preliminary assessment and without conducting an investigation.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal finds that [the Office of the Inspector General] conducted a thorough review of the voluminous documentation submitted by the complainant and a detailed analysis of her allegations. [The Office of the Inspector General]’s conclusion that the complainant’s harassment complaint should be closed was based on the results of its preliminary assessment that “there was no prima facie case of harassment, abuse of authority, retaliation or other misconduct”. In determining that the complaint should be closed for a lack of a prima facie case, [the Office of the Inspector General] acted within its authority and fully in line with the provisions of the [the Office of the Inspector General] Investigation Guidelines […].
Keywords:
investigation; investigative body; rules of the organisation;
Judgment 4745
137th Session, 2024
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to discharge him after due notice.
Consideration 3
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal holds that the [Office of the Inspector General]’s preliminary assessment is not strictly part of the disciplinary proceedings (see, in this connection, Judgment 3944, consideration 4), and Instruction IN/275 does not provide for its disclosure. Therefore, its non-disclosure does not vitiate the disciplinary process. In any case, a complainant is entitled to receive the preliminary assessment, if she or he requests it (see Judgment 4659, consideration 4). In the present case, the complainant did not request the disclosure of the OIG’s preliminary assessment either in his request for review or in his internal appeal. He raised this issue for the first time before the Tribunal and the Tribunal is satisfied that, since the Organization has disclosed it in its submissions before it, the complainant has had ample opportunity to comment on it.
Regarding [the Office of Legal Affairs’] recommendation on disciplinary measures, the Tribunal notes that Instruction IN/275 contains no provision requiring the disclosure of this recommendation to the subject of the disciplinary proceedings. Nevertheless, pursuant to paragraph 20 of Instruction IN/275, [the Office of Legal Affairs’] recommendation is a mandatory step in the disciplinary proceedings and, as such, it is plainly foundational to the disciplinary decision taken at the end of those proceedings.
[…]
[T]he Tribunal is satisfied that the disciplinary proceedings were conducted in compliance with the applicable internal rules […], and consistent with the due process and the adversarial principles (see, for example, Judgments 4011, consideration 9, 3872, consideration 6, and 2771, consideration 15).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2771, 3872, 3944, 4011, 4659
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; disciplinary procedure; inquiry; investigation;
Judgment 4691
136th Session, 2023
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close his complaint of harassment and abuse of authority.
Consideration 11
Extract:
[B]y framing the alleged harassing conduct involving an abuse of authority in the narrow way it did […] together with its consideration of specific issues or events in isolation, it is more likely than not that the OIG failed to consider whether the conduct as a whole involved an abuse of authority (see Judgment 2930, consideration 3) or, putting it slightly differently, whether the cumulative effect of the conduct could be reviewed as harassment and, specifically, an abuse of authority (see Judgment 4347, consideration 30).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2930, 4347
Keywords:
abuse of power; harassment; investigation;
Consideration 13
Extract:
[T]he complainant is entitled to moral damages for the moral injury he undoubtedly suffered as a result of the unlawful peremptory rejection of his complaint of harassment and particularly, abuse of authority and retribution about which, at this time, he obviously felt extremely strongly.
Keywords:
harassment; investigation; moral damages;
Judgment 4679
136th Session, 2023
ITER International Fusion Energy Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject her complaint of harassment, discrimination and abuse of authority.
Consideration 3
Extract:
As to the argument that the persons entrusted with the investigation are in a conflict of interest because they are subject to the hierarchical authority of the person accused of harassment (i.e. the Director-General), the Tribunal recalls its case law which states it is a general rule of law that an official who is called upon to take a decision affecting the rights or duties of other persons subject to her or his jurisdiction must withdraw in cases in which her or his impartiality may be open to question on reasonable grounds. It is immaterial that, subjectively, the official may consider herself or himself able to take an unprejudiced decision; nor is it enough for the persons affected by the decision to suspect its author of prejudice (see Judgment 4240, consideration 10). A conflict of interest occurs in situations where a reasonable person would not exclude partiality, that is, a situation that gives rise to an objective partiality. Even the mere appearance of partiality, based on facts or situations, gives rise to a conflict of interest (see Judgment 3958, consideration 11). An allegation of conflict of interest or lack of impartiality has to be substantiated and based on specific facts, not on mere suspicions or hypotheses. The complainant bears the burden to prove a conflict of interest (see Judgments 4617, consideration 9, and 4616, consideration 6). The mere fact that the staff members entrusted with an investigation are ordinarily under the authority of the Director- General is not a reasonable ground to call their impartiality into question. In the present case, there is no evidence that they had received any instructions from the Director-General (see Judgment 4243, consideration 9). The complainant does not provide persuasive evidence about the existence of a conflict of interest, which is merely hypothetical and not grounded on specific facts.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3958, 4240, 4243, 4616, 4617
Keywords:
conflict of interest; investigation; investigative body;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abuse of power; complaint dismissed; harassment; investigation;
Judgment 4607
135th Session, 2023
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her allegation that the opening of an investigation against her involved abuse of authority and the decision not to investigate her allegations against the Acting Director of the Internal Oversight Division.
Consideration 5
Extract:
[The complainant] has no enforceable legal interest in the fate of her allegation of misconduct against the Acting Director IOD which can be vindicated by orders of the Tribunal. The subject matter, namely the decision not to open an investigation on the alleged misconduct and abuse of authority by the Acting Director IOD, does not concern non-observance of the terms of her appointment or relevant non-observance of provisions of the Staff Regulations, as provided for in Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute (see Judgment 4145, consideration 5, and the case law cited therein).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4145
Keywords:
cause of action; investigation; request to subject someone to disciplinary proceedings;
Judgment 4601
135th Session, 2023
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to summarily dismiss him after an internal complaint of harassment was made against him.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he WTO’s assertion that those complaints did not lead to a full or thorough examination of the situation at the time because the procedure for dealing with harassment complaints was deficient is clearly not an argument capable of justifying that reversal. First, even assuming that the procedure at the time was inadequate, that cannot be relied on by the WTO since the Tribunal has consistently stated that international organisations are required to investigate accusations in this area and to provide protection for persons who claim they are the victims of harassment (see Judgments 2706, consideration 5, and 2552, consideration 3) and also to ensure that their investigative and internal appeal bodies for this purpose are functioning properly (see Judgments 3314, consideration 14, and 3069, consideration 12), these obligations being are part of a more general duty owed by those organisations to provide a safe and adequate environment for their staff, free from physical and psychological risk (see Judgments 4299, consideration 4, and 4171, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2552, 2706, 3069, 3314, 4171, 4299
Keywords:
investigation; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4579
135th Session, 2023
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to discharge him.
Consideration 3
Extract:
[A]ccording to the Tribunal’s case law, the verbatim record of the oral evidence gathered during disciplinary proceedings is not deemed strictly necessary. It is sufficient that the person charged in disciplinary proceedings be informed of the precise allegations made against her or him, provided with the summaries of the witnesses’ testimonies relied upon by the body in charge of the investigation, and enabled to comment on them (see Judgment 2771, consideration 18).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2771
Keywords:
due process; evidence; investigation; witness;
Judgment 4578
135th Session, 2023
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to investigate his allegations of harassment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; harassment; investigation;
Judgment 4549
134th Session, 2022
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the Director-General’s decision to reject her harassment complaint.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The failure, without valid grounds and notwithstanding the discretion conferred by paragraph 9 of Article 13.4 of the Staff Regulations, to hear witnesses potentially supportive of the complainant’s allegations constituted a breach of due process (see Judgment 4111, consideration 3). The complainant’s allegation is therefore well founded. As this error of law vitiates the validity of the investigation report, which forms the basis of the impugned decision, that decision must be set aside, without there being any need to address the complainant’s other pleas (see Judgments 4313, consideration 7, and 4110, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4110, 4111, 4313
Keywords:
due process; harassment; investigation; investigation report; testimony; witness;
Consideration 10
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law, where an investigation into allegations of harassment is seriously flawed, the Tribunal in principle remits the matter to the organization concerned so that a new investigation can be conducted (see, for example, Judgment 4313, consideration 8, and Judgment 4111, consideration 8). In some specific situations the Tribunal may determine whether the harassment occurred (see, for example, Judgment 4241, consideration 15, and Judgment 4207, consideration 21). But in the present case, the Tribunal is satisfied it would not be appropriate to do so. In particular, given that the complainant is still employed by the ILO, in the event that a properly conducted investigation demonstrates that she was the victim of harassment, appropriate measures from the ILO may be warranted.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4111, 4207, 4241, 4313
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; harassment; investigation;
Judgment 4525
134th Session, 2022
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal of his request to be awarded monetary compensation for the material and moral injury he allegedly sustained as a consequence of the IAEA’s failure to investigate allegations of harassment made against him.
Consideration 4
Extract:
Ordinarily, a decision not to conduct an investigation into allegations of harassment and to close the case without further action would not be regarded as a decision adversely affecting the official subject of the allegations, who therefore would have no cause of action to challenge such a decision.
Keywords:
cause of action; harassment; investigation;
Judgment 4522
134th Session, 2022
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to conduct an investigation into allegations of breach of confidentiality and the refusal to disclose two documents.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; confidentiality; disclosure of evidence; investigation;
Judgment 4518
134th Session, 2022
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges his non-appointment to a fixed-term position and the non-renewal of his short-term contract, as well as the organisation’s refusal to conduct an investigation into the allegations of harassment made against him which, according to him, form the basis of the non-appointment and non-renewal decisions.
Consideration 10
Extract:
Whilst in the circumstances of this case it would be impracticable to order the complainant’s reinstatement, ITU will be ordered to compensate him because he was denied the opportunity to be appointed to the advertised post on a two-year contract in circumstances where he was the only candidate whom the Director of TSB and the Chief of Department had […] recommended to fill the post after the selection procedure. But for the unsubstantiated allegations, it is very difficult to avoid the conclusion that he would have been appointed.
Keywords:
harassment; investigation; loss of opportunity; reinstatement;
Judgment 4516
134th Session, 2022
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to investigate his allegations of harassment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; harassment; investigation; patere legem;
Judgment 4515
134th Session, 2022
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the conversion of his suspension with pay into a suspension without pay pending an investigation for harassment undertaken against him.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The suspension provided for under Staff Rule 10.1.3a) is intended to be a measure that may be taken “pending [the outcome of the] investigation” and a staff member subject to it may thus be suspended – whether with or without pay – only until the investigation is completed. As the Tribunal has already had the occasion to hold in relation to the application of similarly worded regulations of another organisation, such a reference to the possibility of suspending an official until the end of the investigation into the facts of which she or he is suspected cannot be interpreted as authorising an extension of that suspension beyond the end of the investigation in question and, in particular, during any disciplinary proceedings subsequently instituted against the official concerned (see Judgment 3880, consideration 20).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3880
Keywords:
investigation; patere legem; suspension;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
