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 1494
80th Session, 1996
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Though the Tribunal held in [Judgment 938 under] 12 that 'a staff member cannot be separated while on sick leave', the ruling must be seen in context: it cannot apply to termination in any circumstances whatever. [...] In [that] case the defendant organisation had dismissed [a staff member] at a time when she said she was ill and had applied for sick leave. The Organisation refused to grant her the leave on the grounds that she was not ill."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 938
Keywords:
case law; contract; extension of contract; illness; international civil service principles; interpretation; non-renewal of contract; sick leave; social benefits; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The judgments [607 and 938 that the complainant] relies on must not be read out of context. The Tribunal was not ruling therein that someone who falls ill towards the end of his appointment should, whatever the circumstances, be entitled to sick leave, to the consequent extension beyond the date of expiry and to pay for the same term. Indeed it ruled out the idea of such extension in Judgment 157 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 157, 607, 938
Keywords:
case law; contract; extension of contract; illness; non-renewal of contract; salary; sick leave; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Whether sick leave is to be extended beyond the date of expiry of an appointment is a question to be seen first and foremost in the light of the social protection afforded by an organisation's rules, which are to be construed according to the law of the international civil service."
Keywords:
case law; contract; international civil service principles; interpretation; sick leave; social benefits; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1486
80th Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"It is true that Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute requires a complainant, before he files suit with the Tribunal, not just to apply for internal review but also to await the outcome of the internal proceedings. Yet that is not a hard-and-fast rule, even though the Statute does not allow any express derogation. If a complainant does his utmost to procure a decision, and if nevertheless the internal appeals body evinces by its statements or conduct an intention not to report within a reasonable time, justice requires that an exception be made. A mere failure to proceed with all proper speed and diligence is not enough: it is only if the proceedings have been so protracted that the delay is inordinate, unexplained and inexcusable that such an intention will be inferred: see Judgments 408 [...] and 451 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VII(1) of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 408, 451
Keywords:
administrative delay; case law; exception; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1481
80th Session, 1996
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The ILO had told the complainant upon recruitment that he could expect to receive an appointment without limit of time in five or six years. The Tribunal holds "that the conditions that precedent requires are met. The Director-General was wrong to refuse him an appointment without limit of time and to grant him only two years".
Keywords:
case law; criteria; duration of appointment; permanent appointment; promise; terms of appointment;
Judgment 1479
80th Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"The Tribunal has often affirmed the principle of good faith by which international organisations are bound and their duty to treat their staff members with consideration and fairness. It has also affirmed - for example in Judgment 946 [...] - the staff member's right to be kept informed of any action that may affect his legitimate interests."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 946
Keywords:
case law; duty to inform; general principle; good faith; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1477
80th Session, 1996
International Training Centre of the International Labour Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"As the Tribunal held in Judgment 1359 [...], an organisation must be careful to abide by the rules on selection and appointment. When the process proves flawed the Tribunal will quash any decisions it engendered and order resumption with due heed to the rules".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1359
Keywords:
appointment; case law; competition; competition cancelled; consequence; due process; flaw; procedural flaw; subsidiary;
Judgment 1475
80th Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The decision to terminate the complainant's appointment was a discretionary one, and consistent precedent has it that the Tribunal will not set aside a decision of that kind unless it shows a mistake of fact or law or a formal or procedural flaw, or some essential fact was overlooked or a clearly mistaken conclusion drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse or lack of authority."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; judicial review; separation from service; termination of employment;
Judgment 1466
80th Session, 1996
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Precedent has it that a time limit is a matter of objective fact and begins to run when a decision is notified. [...] The only exceptions that the Tribunal has allowed are where the complainant has been prevented by vis major from learning of the decision (see Judgment 21 [...]) and where the defendant has misled him or withheld some document from him in breach of good faith (see Judgment 752)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 21, 752
Keywords:
case law; exception; force majeure; good faith; organisation; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1463
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"Several judgments say that a decision on a staff report, being a discretionary one, may be set aside only on limited grounds such as a mistake of fact or of law or failure to take account of some material fact: see [...] Judgments 724 [...], 806 [...] and 1144 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 724, 806, 1144
Keywords:
case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; judicial review; mistake of fact; performance report;
Judgment 1462
79th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
Vide Judgment 398, considerations 1 and 2.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 92 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS GOVERNING OFFICIALS OF THE EUROCONTROL AGENCY
ILOAT Judgment(s): 398
Keywords:
case law; complaint; failure to answer claim; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; staff regulations and rules; time bar;
Judgment 1455
79th Session, 1995
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
Vide Judgment 532, consideration 3.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 3, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 532
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case law; complaint; exception; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; interpretation; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1451
79th Session, 1995
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"In Judgment 1932 - submits the [organisation] - the Tribunal held under 18 and 24 that [...] a suit, [filed in the general interests of the civil service,] of which the hallmark is action by staff associations or agents professing to represent them, does not form part of the system of individual appeal that the organisations which have recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction commonly provide for in their rules and that the Tribunal's own Statute contemplates. The Tribunal need not revert to that case law since this is not such a complaint. It has been filed by several officials with the commendable aim of making the proceedings simpler, and each of them is defending his own individual interests, even though they are the same as the others'. The objection [to receivability for being a 'collective' complaint] fails."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1392
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union;
Consideration 30
Extract:
"The reinstatement of the status quo by the quashing of the decision [to amend the rules of the provident fund so as to confer sole jurisdiction on a national tribunal] restores a situation which is quite consistent with the requirement of rational division of jurisdiction in the international context. Each of the jurisdictions that may be competent - the [national] tribunal and this Tribunal - will be able to determine its own competence according to the material rules on conflict. That was what the Tribunal held in Judgment 1258 on a case in which there was similar conflict of jurisdiction: it said under 4 that it was for each court to rule on its own competence."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1258
Keywords:
applicable law; case law; competence; competence of tribunal; domestic law; general principle; municipal court;
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The [amendment in question] strikes out of the terms of employment ipso facto the safeguard of international judicial review and vests jurisdiction in municipal courts instead. The amendment brings about an immediate and almost irreversible change in the system of appeal. So [...] every staff member has an actual and present interest in having light shed on the matter. The Tribunal affords guarantees of a system of international law within the bounds of its competence: see Judgments 1265, under 24, and 1328, under 13. It would therefore be wrong to deny the staff the right of appeal on the grounds that the impugned decision is general in purport."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1265, 1328
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; competence of tribunal; complaint; general decision; internal appeal; municipal court; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; safeguard; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;
Consideration 23
Extract:
"The Tribunal concurs fully with what the Union says about the legal process it chose to follow in setting up its provident scheme [under municipal law]. It is true that other such schemes have been set up under international law and that the Tribunal has generally preferred that any dispute it may hear be resolved by the rules of the international civil service. But it has also been at pains to except any case in which there is express renvoi to municipal law in an organisation's rules or in the terms of appointment: for recent examples see Judgments 1311 and 1369, both under 15."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1311, 1369
Keywords:
applicable law; case law; contract; domestic law; provident fund; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 19
Extract:
The organisation objects to the receivability of the complaint because "the impugned decision makes amendments to the regulations and is therefore a general one about the tenor of rules. As was said in Judgment 1393, under 6 to 8, the Tribunal has often ruled on the issue, especially for the purpose of determining when the time limit starts for appeal. It has held that where a general decision gives rise to decisions affecting individuals the time limit is set off only on notification to the official of the individual decision that affects him. Moreover, as was held in Judgment 1000, under 12, the employee may, when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly, 'challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision [...] that affords the basis of the individual one'. In sum, the staff member need not ordinarily impugn at once a general decision he believes has caused him injury but may, without any risk of being time-barred, wait until the general decision affects him in the form of an individual one."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000, 1393
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; case law; cause of action; complaint; date of notification; general decision; individual decision; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1450
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 23
Extract:
"[E]specially when there is not full employment, the decision not to renew a contract on expiry may cause hardship. But that is why, in keeping with precedent, the Tribunal will in each case look to the circumstances in which the decision not to renew or not to convert to permanent appointment may have come about."
Keywords:
case law; contract; fixed-term; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; permanent appointment;
Consideration 19
Extract:
"The Tribunal has never ruled out municipal law a priori. Although it is ordinarily and essentially competent in a context of international law, it may well have to heed some provisions of municipal law where, as indeed in this case, there is renvoi to such law in a contract of service or in an organisation's rules. Precedent further has it that there may be reference to municipal law for the sake of comparison and so as to educe certain general principles of law that apply to the international civil service."
Keywords:
applicable law; case law; contract; domestic law; general principle; international civil service principles; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;
Judgment 1448
79th Session, 1995
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 17-18
Extract:
"The Tribunal holds that the decision [against which the complainant submitted an internal appeal] was not a final one, the object [...] being only to initiate discussion: see Judgment 336 [...]. Although he had been identified as a staff member 'likely to be terminated', there was [...] no actual decision that he would be terminated at such and such a date or on stated terms". "He failed to submit an appeal [against the final decision] and thereby failed to exhaust the internal means of redress available to him. Accordingly, his complaint is irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Tribunal's Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 336
Keywords:
absence of final decision; case law; complaint; decision; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; statement of intent;
Judgment 1446
79th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The precedents have it that a right is 'acquired' when someone who has it may, because of its fundamental importance to the balance of rights and duties that define the relationship of employment, demand that it be respected not withstanding any amendment to the rules: see Judgments 61, 368 [...], 832, 986 [...] and, under 6, 1330 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 61, 368, 832, 986, 1330
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; case law; condition; contract; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Consideration 13
Extract:
The case law says that "no benefit - not even a long-standing one - may be treated as an acquired right if it has no logical basis: see Judgment 1241 [...] under 24. "
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1241
Keywords:
acquired right; case law; condition;
Consideration 13
Extract:
It is "worth recalling [...] that the increases at issue [...] offend against the norms of the 'common system', which are binding on any organisation that belongs: see Judgments 1239, [...] under 7 and 8, and 1265, [...] under 36."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1239, 1265
Keywords:
applicable law; binding character; case law; coordinated organisations; rule of another organisation;
Judgment 1445
79th Session, 1995
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Consistent precedent has it that there cannot be breach of equal treatment unless there is different treatment of officials who are in like position in fact and in law."
Keywords:
breach; case law; condition; equal treatment;
Judgment 1444
79th Session, 1995
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1161, consideration 4.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1161
Keywords:
career; case law; discretion; executive head; extension of contract; probationary period; purpose; qualifications; separation from service; termination of employment;
Judgment 1441
79th Session, 1995
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Although an explanation of the reasons for an administrative decision affords an essential safeguard of the staff member's rights, consistent precedent has it that the form the explanation takes will depend on the nature of the decision and the context in which it is taken. Here UNESCO is right in stating that each successive decision, from the provisional suspension from duty to the final act of dismissal, was taken in a context that the complainant was quite well aware of. The suspension came after the questioning of him by the inspectors; the dismissal after the report by the Disciplinary Committee; and the final confirmation of dismissal after the Appeals Board hearings. The text of each decision so explicitly cites the material background that he may not properly contend he was caught unawares or profess ignorance of the reasons for each decision and what it meant."
Keywords:
case law; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; purport; safeguard; termination of employment;
Consideration 18
Extract:
"The complainant held a fixed-term appointment. His proven shortcomings and misconduct were undoubtedly such that the organization might have refused without further ado to extend his appointment. As the Tribunal has always acknowledged, an organisation has discretion in the matter and, as many rulings bear out, it may refuse renewal on grounds of unsatisfactory performance or misconduct: for a recent example see Judgment 1405."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1405
Keywords:
case law; contract; discretion; fixed-term; misconduct; non-renewal of contract; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1438
79th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was denied a further extension of the period in which he was entitled to claim the refund of removal expenses. The Tribunal considers that "in accordance with its case law, [it] will not substitute its own views for those of the director-general in a matter in which he has discretion."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; executive head; judicial review; new time limit; refund; removal expenses; time limit;
Judgment 1436
79th Session, 1995
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As was said for example in Judgment 1223, the Tribunal will not interfere with comparison of candidates in a competition. Only when it appears that the choice rests on a mistake of fact or law or that there has probably been misuse of authority will the Tribunal order the defendant to produce further evidence so that it may review such comparison."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1223
Keywords:
abuse of power; burden of proof; candidate; case law; competition; due process; evidence; further submissions; judicial review; mistake of fact; misuse of authority; presumption of innocence; qualifications; selection procedure;
Judgment 1433
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Article VII (1) of the Tribunal's Statute requires that for a complaint to be receivable the complainant must have 'exhausted such other means of resisting a final decision as are open to him under the applicable staff regulations'. The Tribunal recognises that reasonable time must be allowed for completing the internal appeal procedure. Yet in this case [fifteen months had passed between the date of the complainant's internal appeal and the organization's response to the appeal] objections to receivability ill become the defendant".
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; date; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; reply;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant was kept waiting over sixteen months [...] for an answer to his request [...] and fifteen months for the [organisation] to file its reply [...] to his appeal [...] and so let the internal appeal procedure go ahead. The Tribunal holds that since he took all the steps he could take to obtain a final decision and since the [organisation] failed to discharge promptly its obligations under the internal procedure he was justified in coming to the Tribunal. That is in keeping with what the Tribunal ruled in, for example, Judgment 1243 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1243
Keywords:
absence of final decision; administrative delay; case law; complaint; date; direct appeal to tribunal; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; reply;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 | next >
|
