Case sent back to organisation (130,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Case sent back to organisation
Total judgments found: 162
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 3935
125th Session, 2018
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant accuses his former supervisor of moral harassment.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The Tribunal has already found in similar cases that when an internal harassment complaint has wrongly been dismissed, it is not appropriate to order that an investigation be re-opened if that course would raise practical difficulties of this nature (see, for example, in another case concerning a UNESCO official, Judgment 3639, under 8 to 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3639
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; harassment;
Judgment 3919
125th Session, 2018
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the Director-General’s decision to reject her claim for compensation for service-incurred illness.
Considerations 14-15
Extract:
[T]he HBA and, in turn, the Director-General found that all of the relevant facts of the case had been taken into account. However, it is observed that in arriving at the conclusion that there were no valid reasons for the claim to be accepted for consideration, the Director-General did not take into consideration that the progressive nature of the complainant's illness and all of her relevant surrounding personal circumstances presented valid reasons for making the claim for compensation on the date that she did.
Accordingly, the Director-General's decision of 11 August 2015 and that of 13 March 2014 will be set aside, and the complainant's claim for compensation will be remitted to WHO for the ACCC's consideration of whether the complainant's two identified illnesses can be attributed to the performance of official duties.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; illness; service-incurred;
Judgment 3910
125th Session, 2018
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the IAEA’s refusal to recognise his illness as service-incurred.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; illness; service-incurred;
Considerations 10 and 12
Extract:
The determinative issue is whether the failure to provide Dr S.'s report to the JABCC constitutes a reviewable error. The IAEA submits that there is no provision in Appendix D that, in case of disagreement, the minority member is entitled to submit a minority report. The IAEA adds that, in any event, the fact that Dr S. did so does not prejudice the validity of the official Medical Board report submitted to the JABCC. At the outset, it is observed that it is not a matter of the "minority member [being] entitled to submit a minority report" or whether Appendix D contemplates a minority report. It is implicit in the composition of the three-member Medical Board provided in Article 41 that there may be a dissenting view. In the performance of its role to make recommendations to the Director General, it is essential that the JABCC have both the majority and dissenting opinions. In the end, it is for the Director General to make the final determination in light of all available information. The Agency's failure to provide the JABCC with Dr S.'s opinion compromises the benefits of having a three-member Board and impairs the JABCC's ability to properly perform its function.
[...]
In the circumstances, the Director General's decision of 22 April 2014 and his earlier decision of 24 October 2012 will be set aside. The matter will be remitted to the IAEA for the JABCC's reconsideration after having obtained a copy of Dr S.'s report.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3906
125th Session, 2018
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of her fixed-term appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; internal appeal; internal appeals body; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 19
Extract:
In the present case, the Appeals Board was cognisant of the complainant's possible confusion stemming from the surrounding circumstances and that she was not informed of her appeal rights. In the circumstances, it was incumbent on the Appeals Board to consider whether there were exceptional circumstances warranting the exercise of its discretionary authority to waive the time limits. As the Appeals Board's recommendation is tainted by errors of fact and law, the Registrar's decision based on that recommendation is also tainted by those errors and will be set aside.
Indeed, for the foregoing reasons, there were clearly grounds on which a conclusion could be reached that there were exceptional circumstances and the Appeals Board should have considered waiving compliance with the time limits and considered the appeal on the merits. The case will be remitted to the ICC for that purpose.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3905
125th Session, 2018
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of his fixed-term appointment.
Consideration 18
Extract:
[T]here are clearly grounds on which a conclusion could be reached that there were exceptional circumstances and the Appeals Board should have waived compliance with the time limits and considered the appeal on the merits. The case will be remitted to the ICC for that purpose.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; internal appeal; internal appeals body; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 3887
124th Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to dismiss him, for misconduct, with immediate effect and with reduction of pension entitlements.
Considerations 13 and 16
Extract:
[T]he principle of due process and the duty of care require the Disciplinary Committee, in accordance with Article 101(3) of the Service Regulations (which provides that "[i]f the Disciplinary Committee requires further information concerning the facts complained of or the circumstances in which they arose, it may order an inquiry in which each side can submit its case and reply to the case of the other side") to order a medical assessment of the complainant by an expert, and the convening of a Medical Committee if necessary. The medical expert(s) shall also take into consideration all documents in the file submitted to the Tribunal.
[...]
The case must be sent back to the EPO which will order a medical assessment of the complainant and, if necessary, the convening of a Medical Committee.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; disciplinary procedure; health reasons; misconduct;
Judgment 3871
124th Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges WHO’s refusal to reinstate him after the decision to dismiss him was set aside.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[The HBA] found [...] that "the circumstances in which the reprimand of 25 September [2008] ha[d] been decided and upheld by the decision of [...] 4 November 2008 (recte 2009 ) [were] tainted with several procedural flaws".
It did not draw any consequences from this statement and made no recommendation in respect of the reprimand or the decision [...] upholding it. In her decision [...], the Director-General noted the "procedural shortcomings" recorded by the HBA in relation to the written reprimand [...], but she did not draw any conséquences from this.
In these circumstances, the case must be remitted to WHO in order that a final decision may be taken as soon as possible on the complainant's challenge of the written reprimand [...], after completion of the appeal procedure applicable to disciplinary matters on the date on which this judgment is delivered.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reinstatement;
Judgment 3870
124th Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant alleges that he was promised promotion to grade D-2.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; promise; promotion;
Consideration 6
Extract:
The impugned decision must [...] be set aside. Since the HBA has not examined the substance of the complainant's internal appeal, the case must be remitted to the Organization in order that the Global Board of Appeal may, within a time limit which the Tribunal will set at three months as from the public delivery of this judgment, examine the merits of that appeal and, in particular, the question of whether the promise on which the complainant relies was in fact made and, if so, the scope of that promise.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3854
124th Session, 2017
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not award him compensation for a service-incurred disability.
Consideration 12
Extract:
The litigation between the complainant and the OPCW has lasted several years and it is desirable in the interests of the parties and the public interest to bring it to an end. Accordingly, the OPCW will be ordered, in agreement with the complainant, to appoint a medical expert with a specialisation in psychiatry within sixty days from the date of the public delivery of this judgment. The medical expert will assess whether the complainant incurred a work-related disability, which is distinguishable from any previous existing conditions or disabilities, specifically as a result of his treatment by the OPCW during the arbitration process [...]. In order to make this assessment the medical expert will examine the complainant, take into consideration all the evidence in the file submitted to the Tribunal in these proceedings and the judgments of the Tribunal dealing with the complainant’s first to sixth complaints. The expert may ask the parties for any pertinent information, while respecting the adversarial principle. The expert will submit her or his report to the OPCW, which will forward it to the ABCC for consideration. The OPCW will notify the President of the Tribunal in the event that the parties do not agree on the appointment of the medical expert. Upon receiving such notification, the President of the Tribunal will appoint a medical expert by her or his own order and notify the parties accordingly. The OPCW will be ordered to pay the expert’s fees and the costs of the examination. The ABCC, as a matter of urgency, and having given the parties the opportunity to comment on the new medical report, will make a recommendation to the Director-General on the basis of that report and the Director-General will take a new decision.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; service-incurred;
Judgment 3850
124th Session, 2017
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to amend his job title.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; consultation; decision quashed; title of post;
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
Staff Rule 6 1.03 must be interpreted in the sense that, before taking any decision which is determinative of the appeal (and not an interim decision), the Director-General must consult the JAAB. This interpretation is in keeping with the purpose of the provision and is consistent with the French version of its text. It is also borne out by the wording of [...] Staff Regulation R 6 1.05.
As the Director-General did not consult the JAAB, the impugned decision will be set aside and the case will be remitted to EMBL for the Director-General to take a new decision on the complainant's appeal after consultation of the JAAB.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3796
123rd Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of his request for review of the EPO Administrative Council's decision CA/D 10/14 introducing a new career system, on which the final decision was taken by the Administrative Council.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; impugned decision;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The flaw identified [...], stemming from the Administrative Council's lack of competence to review the request according to the system referred to in Title VIII of the Service Regulations, warrants setting aside the impugned decision and remitting the matter to the Organisation in order for the President, as the competent authority, to take a decision on the complainant's request for review within two months from the date of the delivery of this judgment. The President may consult the Administrative Council if he considers it desirable to do so having regard to the nature of the challenged decision.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3786
123rd Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge a decision of the Administrative Council introducing provisions in the Service Regulations for permanent employees regulating the right to strike.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; joinder; right to strike; strike;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The flaw identified [...], stemming from the Administrative Council's lack of competence to review the requests according to the system referred to in Title VIII of the Service Regulations, warrants setting aside the impugned decisions and remitting the matter to the EPO in order for the President, as the competent authority, to take a decision on the complainant's requests for review within two months from the date of the delivery in public of this judgment. The President may consult with the Administrative Council if he considers it desirable to do so having regard to the nature of the appealed decision.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3785
123rd Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject his request for review of an EPO notice concerning patent applications, having regard to the composition of the Appeals Committee.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; impugned decision;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The impugned decision [...] must be set aside. The case will be sent back to the EPO for the Appeals Committee, composed in accordance with the applicable rules, to examine the appeal.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3759
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term appointment following the abolition of her position.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reassignment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
Insofar as the impugned decision concerns the abolition of the complainant's position in the Comoros, it must be set aside [...]. The case must be remitted to the Organization for it to examine the internal appeal filed by the complainant against that measure.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3738
123rd Session, 2017
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject his claim for a termination indemnity.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; terminal entitlements;
Consideration 11
Extract:
[T]he impugned decision of 24 March 2014 wrongly rejected the claim for retrospective payment of a termination indemnity and compensation for moral injury submitted by the complainant on 18 February 2014 on the grounds that it was time-barred, whereas the Secretary-General should have considered its substance. Accordingly, that decision must be set aside and the case remitted to the ITU for a new decision on the merits of the claim to be taken within 30 days from the public delivery of this judgment.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
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 13
Extract:
The case will be remitted to the ITU for a full and proper examination of the initial internal complaint lodged by the complainant [...] under the terms envisaged by Service Order No. 05/05, as should originally have been the case. Indeed, contrary to what the complainant suggests in his submissions, the Tribunal cannot rule at this stage on the merits of the allegations made in that complaint since most of them have not been subject to the prior investigations necessary to make an informed assessment, which the ITU’s internal bodies alone are able to conduct effectively. The ITU must therefore, within 30 days of the public delivery of this judgment, set up a new commission of inquiry to investigate the said internal complaint.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; harassment;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment; late appeal;
Judgment 3732
123rd Session, 2017
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss his allegations of harassment and abuse of authority as unfounded.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The two flaws identified [...] warrant remitting the matter back to the UPU so that the competent authority may take a new decision upon recommendation of a new, properly composed [Joint Appeals Committee].
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3695
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the EPO’s rejection of his two internal appeals against the Ombudsman’s failure to follow the formal procedure in respect of his harassment complaint and against the President’s decision to reject that harassment complaint.
Considerations 9-11
Extract:
The IAC’s report of 2 August 2011 appears to be the product of a balanced, rational and thoughtful consideration of the evidence and arguments advanced by the parties in the internal appeals. In the final express decision of 11 October 2012 (communicated by the Vice-President of Directorate General 4), the reasoning of the President as regards internal appeal RI/35/10 was that “in view of the fact that the investigation of [the complainant’s] complaint from 2008 [could] not be repeated, taking into account the ongoing efforts to find a balanced and global solution to [his] different requests and grievances, [the President had decided] to reject this appeal as well and refrain from any payments”. An executive head of an organisation has a duty to substantiate a final decision departing from the recommendations of an appeal committee (see, for example, Judgments 2339, consideration 5, 2699, consideration 24, and 3208, consideration 11). The reasons of the President singularly fail to come to grips with the reasoning of the IAC and fail to explain, in any satisfactory and persuasive way, why the recommendations of the IAC, whether the majority or the minority, should be rejected. For this reason alone the impugned decision rejecting the complainant’s appeal in internal appeal RI/35/10 should be set aside. The complainant is entitled to costs.
The complainant does not come to grips with the reasoning of the IAC and the argument of the EPO in these proceedings that the issue raised in his internal appeal RI/145/09 is moot. This appears to be correct and nothing further need be said.
Whether and, if so, to what extent, the Tribunal’s decision in Judgment 3337 has a bearing on any final decision the President might make in relation to internal appeal RI/35/10 is initially a matter for the President presumably acting on legal advice. However, the Tribunal does note that the subject matter of that judgment concerned events and issues which, at most, overlap in a limited way with events and issues raised in internal appeal RI/35/10.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2339, 2699, 3208
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment;
Judgment 3694
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject his appeal against the new Internal Instructions on the patent granting procedure, contending inter alia that the Appeals Committee was improperly composed.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that none of the cases cited by the Appeals Committee dealt with the composition of an internal appeal body. It also observes that considering the quasi-judicial functions of the Appeals Committee, its composition is fundamental and changing it changes the body itself. While it is true that the fundamental functions of that body must not be paralysed, it is also true that the body itself cannot be changed through a changed composition. The balance sought to be achieved by the composition of this body, which includes members appointed by the Administration and the staff representation, is a fundamental guarantee of its impartiality. That balanced composition is an essential feature underpinning its existence. Without it, it is not the Appeals Committee. The case will therefore be sent back to the EPO so that the Appeals Committee, composed in accordance with the applicable rules, may examine the appeal.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; internal appeals body;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; internal appeals body;
Judgment 3683
122nd Session, 2016
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his temporary appointment beyond its expiry date.
Considerations 1-3
Extract:
[T]he complainant disputed the grounds for the decision [...] not to extend his temporary appointment beyond its expiry date. In so doing, he must be considered to have initiated an internal appeal. However, no action was ever taken on his appeal.
Under Staff Rule 1230.8.1, an action becomes final only when the staff member has received written notification thereof. Given that the [...] appeal was filed, the final action for the purposes of this provision would be the decision to dismiss the appeal, but in this case written notification was not received because [...] no such decision was ever taken. Accordingly, the time limit for an appeal to the RBA never began to run and the RBA was wrong to consider that the appeal filed with it on 17 February 2010 was irrecevable.
The decision of 17 September 2012 must hence be set aside and the case remitted to WHO for the appeal of 17 February 2010 to be examined on the merits by the RBA.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
