Case law (179, 687, 856,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Case law
Total judgments found: 279
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 | next >
Judgment 1601
82nd Session, 1997
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
"The Tribunal has already held - for example, in Judgment 1081 [...] under 4 - the mere fact that a decision affects a category of staff and is therefore a general one does preclude challenge. To quote Article VII(2) [of the Tribunal's Statute], which is about the time limits, a complainant may challenge 'a decision affecting a class of officials'. Yet not every complaint that challenges a general decision will be receivable. The complainant must comply with the requirement in Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute that internal remedies be first exhausted. In keeping with that rule and with precedent - for example Judgment 1134 [...] under 4 - 'a complaint will be irreceivable if it challenges a general decision that must ordinarily be put into effect by individual decisions against which internal appeal will lie'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) AND (2) OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1081, 1134
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; complaint; general decision; iloat statute; individual decision; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1590
82nd Session, 1997
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The complainant contends that what the impugned decision entailed was really transfer and a change of post. He is mistaken. The duties of a post are determined by the description of it in the letter of appointment and by any later changes: see Judgments 1103, under 3 and 4, and 1146, under 4 and 7."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1103, 1146
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; appointment; case law; decision; post; post description; transfer;
Judgment 1564
82nd Session, 1997
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The firm case law has it that the Tribunal will not interfere with the comparison of entrants in a competition. Only when it appears that the choice of candidate may rest on some mistake of fact or law or there may have been misuse of authority will the Tribunal order the production of evidence so that it may review such comparison and will the complainant be entitled to see such evidence. In the instant case the review of the selection procedure reveals neither a breach of the Organization's Staff Regulations or other rules, nor any mistake of fact or law, nor misuse of authority."
Keywords:
abuse of power; candidate; case law; competition; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; discretion; due process; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; misuse of authority; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1549
81st Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"When an organisation wants to fill a post by competition it must comply with the material rules and the general precepts of the case law."
Keywords:
appointment; case law; competition; due process; general principle; international civil service principles; organisation's duties; post; selection procedure; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The purpose of competition is to let everyone who wants a post compete for it equally. So precedent demands scrupulous compliance with the rules announced beforehand: patere legem quam ipse fecisti."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 107, 729, 1071, 1077, 1158, 1223, 1359
Keywords:
appointment; case law; competition; due process; equal treatment; organisation's duties; patere legem; selection procedure; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"An official of an international organisation who applies for a vacancy is entitled to have his application considered and assessed according to the set procedure once the organisation admits it under the terms of the vacancy notice. It may not deny that an applicant has a cause of action after it has appointed someone else, especially if the applicant is challenging the appointment on the grounds of breach of his rights in failure to apply the proper procedure".
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; cause of action; competition; due process; internal candidate; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1547
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Precedent has it that an organisation has some latitude in affording facilities to a staff union and its decisions are not subject to judicial review. That is not so, however, where it is charged with breach of freedom of association. The Tribunal will indeed interfere if the effect of the impugned decision is to hamper the freedom of speech that any union must enjoy. Refusal to deliver invitations to a union meeting is unquestionably a breach of the privacy of mail and of the freedom of speech that is part and parcel of freedom of association."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; facilities; flaw; freedom of association; freedom of speech; judicial review; limits; staff union; staff union activity;
Judgment 1544
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"A firm line of precedent has it that though a fixed-term appointment ends automatically at the scheduled date of expiry the staff member must be told of the true grounds for non-renewal and given reasonable notice of it even if the contract does not expressly so require."
Keywords:
case law; contract; date of notification; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties;
Judgment 1541
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"According to precedent complaints are to be joined only if they raise the same issues of fact and of law. The [complainant's] ninth and tenth complaints do rest on the same facts [...] and impugn the same decision, albeit each challenges a different part of it. But the issues of law are different [...] so the conditions for joinder are not met."
Keywords:
case law; complainant; complaint; condition; identical facts; joinder; refusal;
Judgment 1528
81st Session, 1996
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The precedents are clear: "A reply to a further request for reconsideration is not a new decision setting off a new time limit for appeal. The complaint fails because it is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
case law; complaint; confirmatory decision; iloat statute; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 1525
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The breach of due process [that tainted the decision not to renew the complainant's appointment] caused him moral injury that warrants redress. But he has sufficient redress in the award of full pay from the date of his departure without having had to provide any services in return [the Tribunal cites the case law]".
Keywords:
case law; compensation; date; decision; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; procedural flaw; reinstatement; salary;
Judgment 1522
81st Session, 1996
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"That he set out his pleas in a brief entered several months [after filing his complaint] after due extension of the time limit granted for the purpose, has no bearing on receivability. As was held in Judgment 1305 [...] under 16 - to which the Tribunal draws the organization's attention - the Registrar may as such take any action he sees fit to safeguard due process."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1305
Keywords:
case law; complaint; correction of complaint; formal requirements; iloat statute; new time limit; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; submissions; tribunal;
Judgment 1520
81st Session, 1996
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Organization objects "that the complainants are just acting as a front for the Staff Association and fall foul of the precedents that declare complaints by such associations to be irreceivable: see for example Judgment 911. [The Tribunal finds that] the complainants have filed complaints in their own name and are quite free to claim rights as officials of the WTO by the means at their disposal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 911
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff representative; staff union;
Judgment 1519
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"The complainants argue that the [salary] survey ought to have compared jobs at like levels of seniority inside and outside [the organization] and not ignored the inverted 'pyramid' of the age structure of [the organization's] staff. There is merit to the criticism. Yet to whichever side one may tend on that point, the comparison is fated to go awry. In any event there was nothing unlawful in the approach the survey took. Neither [the ICSC] nor [the] organization went beyond the bounds of the discretion that the case law allow".
Keywords:
case law; discretion; flemming principle; general service category; icsc decision; inquiry; investigation; salary; seniority; step; terms of appointment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Tribunal's power of review over the setting of pay has been defined in, for example, Judgments 1000 [...], 1265 [...], 1498 [...] and 1499 [...]. Thus Judgment 1265 says that the Tribunal will review both the validity of the criteria on which the methodology rests and the [International Civil Service] Commission's compliance with the methodology."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000, 1265, 1498, 1499
Keywords:
case law; icsc decision; judicial review; salary; scale;
Judgment 1514
81st Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
As said in Judgments 1329 and 1368 "there is no obligation in law to align with the cost of living or with take-home pay. Though CERN must work out the pay raises fairly and objectively, with due regard to the relevant components, the methodology puts it under no obligation to match pay rises to trends in the cost of living in Geneva. That would be tantamount to indexing, and the rules do not require it."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1329, 1368
Keywords:
adjustment; binding character; case law; cost-of-living increase; organisation's duties; reckoning; salary; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 12
Extract:
As first set out in Judgment 986 [...] and reaffirmed in Judgment 1368, "the case law is that international officials may allege breach of an acquired right when there is impairment of an essential and fundamental term of conditions of employment; and that is so even where impairment is gradual and due to an accretion of final decisions which are no longer open to challenge and each of which, taken singly, would not itself have been deemed unlawful."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 986, 1368
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; breach; case law; cumulative decisions; judicial review; terms of appointment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
In the light of Judgment 1368 "what [CERN] had to do was not just take new decisions untainted with the flaw the Tribunal had found but apply all the other material, procedural and substantive rules, which, having set aside the impugned decisions on the grounds of that flaw alone, the Tribunal had had no need to comment on. So any objections to the lawfulness of the decisions taken in compliance with the duty [set by the Tribunal] have a bearing on the execution of the judgment. And, as is plain from the case law - see, for example Judgments 732 [...] and 1328 [...] - the complainants did not have to go through the internal appeal procedure before coming back to the Tribunal."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 732, 1328, 1368
Keywords:
application for execution; case law; due process; exception; execution of judgment; internal remedies exhausted; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties;
Consideration 12
Extract:
"The complainants put their cumulative loss at some 10 per cent of the purchasing power of their pay since 1990 [...] and say it impairs an essential term of employment. A fall in purchasing power below some critical point may indeed be breach of an official's acquired right. But, save where the written rules require the indexing of pay, not every financial setback the official may suffer will amount to such breach." (The Tribunal cites Judgment 832.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 832
Keywords:
acquired right; adjustment; breach; case law; cost-of-living increase; cumulative decisions; reduction of salary; salary; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Judgment 1513
81st Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As a general rule a complainant may not be entitled to consult any records that may have been made of discussions by a selection committee: members of such committees would not feel free to discuss candidates independently in future if they felt at risk of having there own views divulged: see Judgment 556."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 556
Keywords:
case law; competition; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; report; request by a party; selection board;
Judgment 1509
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"Article II(5) empowers the Tribunal to hear a complaint which an official of an international organisation that has duly recognised its jurisdiction has filed and which alleges non-observance of either the terms of the official's appointment or the Staff Regulations. As the Tribunal said in Judgment 231 [...], those are 'two conditions which in practice coincide'. The reference to 'Staff Regulations' means those of the organisation of which a complainant is or was an official and does not include the Staff Regulations of any other."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II(5) OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 231
Keywords:
applicable law; breach; case law; competence of tribunal; contract; declaration of recognition; iloat statute; locus standi; official; rule of another organisation; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
Judgment 1502
81st Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Organization's "own interests and sound management demand strict compliance with time limits, and non-compliance means forfeiting a right or the exercise thereof: see Judgment 1446 [...] under 3, the further judgments cited therein and Judgment 1485 [...]. A time limit is not to be waived just because claims are seldom late or because the consequences of refusing waiver would be too harsh."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1466, 1485
Keywords:
case law; delay; exception; interpretation; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Time limits must be construed in good faith. If an organisation wants to put procedural restrictions on one of the staff member's rights or on the exercise thereof it must draft clearly enough to avoid setting traps."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1376
Keywords:
case law; delay; good faith; interpretation; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 1498
80th Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"As is plain from the case law, the setting of pay scales is at an organisation's discretion. The Tribunal has recognised as much in Judgments 1000 [...] and 1265 [...], where under 26 it said, quite specifically, that it would not interfere in the drafting of the salary policy that the exercise of such discretion was based on, even though it did have power of review in the area. The discretionary authority of the Agency holds good for interim adjustments as well as for the setting of pay scales on the strength of the five-yearly general surveys."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000, 1265
Keywords:
adjustment; case law; discretion; judicial review; salary; scale;
Judgment 1497
80th Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The defendant argues that since [the selected candidate] was an internal candidate it was right anyway to give her priority in the process of selection. The plea fails. As the Tribunal held, for example, in Judgment 519 [...], priority is not due to an internal applicant who does not have the minimum qualifications."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 519
Keywords:
appointment; case law; competition; condition; internal candidate; priority; qualifications;
Judgment 1496
80th Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The Tribunal would allow a complaint against a decision to transfer an official "if it were a hidden disciplinary sanction because there are specific procedural rules to protect a staff member when disciplinary action is taken: see for example Judgments 126, under 4 and 9, 1078, under 16, and 1407, under 18. In processing, ordering and notifying transfer an organisation must heed the staff member's dignity and good name and not cause unnecessary hardship: see Judgments 367, under 13 and 14, 631, under 27 and 28, 942, under 4, and 1234, under 15 and 19. And the decision must follow a proper enquiry: see Judgment 942, under 4."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 126, 367, 631, 942, 1078, 1234, 1407
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; due process; hidden disciplinary measure; inquiry; investigation; misuse of authority; moral injury; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's interest; transfer;
Judgment 1495
80th Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"A decision determining a career path in accordance with CERN rules is analogous to a decision about grading. A long line of precedent leaves such a decision to the Director-General's discretion."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; executive head; judicial review; post classification; staff regulations and rules;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 | next >
|
