ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

Organisation's duties (202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 645,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Organisation's duties
Total judgments found: 658

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >



  • Judgment 3908


    125th Session, 2018
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to abolish his post and terminate his appointment.

    Considerations 16-19

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal has long recognised the right of an international organisation to restructure and abolish positions (see, for example, Judgment 2742, consideration 34). This will imperil the continuing employment of the occupants of those abolished positions. However a concomitant of that right to abolish positions is an obligation to deal fairly with the staff who occupy those abolished positions. That extends to finding, if they exist, other positions within the organisation for which those staff have the experience and qualifications. The Tribunal accepts that there may be other disqualifying criteria. One might be, in a particular set of circumstances, that the number of staff whose positions have been abolished exceeds the number of available positions. However the imprecise concept of “unsuitability” as assessed by a selection committee as if it were a competition for initial appointment, might not be enough to disqualify a staff member unless it can be demonstrated that there is a real and substantial reason why a staff member in an abolished position will not be able to perform the duties of the available position satisfactorily notwithstanding they have the required qualifications and experience. This would be all the more so, as is the case in these proceedings, where the functions of the new position reflect some of the functions of the position which is being abolished and there has been no material adverse assessment of the performance of the staff member in the performance of those functions in the abolished position.
    [...]
    The Tribunal is satisfied that the ICC did not take adequate steps to reassign the complainant after the abolition of his post. To reject his candidature for a number of available positions on the basis that he was not suitable as part of an assessment in a competitive selection process, falls short of what was required. There is no reason, discernible from the pleas, why the complainant could not have been reassigned or redeployed to one of the new positions to which some of the functions were assigned from his abolished position and in particular the Deputy Legal Counsel position discussed in the preceding consideration.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2742

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment; reorganisation;



  • Judgment 3903


    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 24

    Extract:

    [T]here is no evidence in the record to support the assertion that a review of the requirements of newly created positions was undertaken to ascertain whether the complainant had the necessary qualifications for any of those positions. It would be expected that the complainant would have at least been informed that other options had been considered. More importantly, it is also noted that the possible options considered were limited to the newly created positions as a result of the restructuring. The duty contemplated in the case law is aimed at finding other employment within the broader organisation and is not limited to newly created positions as a result of restructuring. As stated in the case law, the failure to explore with the complainant other possible options within the Court was a breach of the ICC’s duty to treat the complainant with dignity and respect (see, for example, Judgment 2902, under 14).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3902


    125th Session, 2018
    Centre for the Development of Enterprise
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to pay him the indemnity due in the event of the closure of the CDE.

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    The right which the Tribunal must uphold is the right to remain in employment, not the right to termination thereof. The Tribunal considers that termination of employment must be an ultima ratio measure to which recourse may be had only after all other alternatives have been examined and found to be impracticable (see Judgment 2830, under 8(a)). At all events, continued employment must be preferred to redundancy.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; organisation's duties; termination of employment;



  • Judgment 3861


    124th Session, 2017
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal to grant her flexible working arrangements during the breastfeeding period.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    In Judgment 3024, under 12, the Tribunal recalled that the principle of good faith and the concomitant duty of care demand that international organisations treat their staff with due consideration in order to avoid causing them undue injury; an employer must consequently inform officials in advance of any action that may imperil their rights or harm their rightful interests (see Judgment 2768, under 4).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2768, 3024

    Keywords:

    duty of care; duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3692


    122nd Session, 2016
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant who, at the material time, was working as a patent examiner, objects to three of his staff reports, submits that he was subjected to harassment and challenges the rejection of his request for an independent examination of several of his dissenting opinions on patent applications.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    [I]t is well settled by the Tribunal’s case law that if the rules of an international organisation require that an appraisal form must be signed not only by the direct supervisor of the staff member concerned but also by her or his second-level supervisor, this is designed to guarantee oversight, at least prima facie, of the objectivity of the report. The purpose of such a rule is to ensure that responsibilities are shared between these two authorities and that the staff member who is being appraised is shielded from a biased assessment by a supervisor, who should not be the only person issuing an opinion on the staff member’s skills and performance. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the competent second-level supervisor should take care to ascertain that the assessment submitted for her or his approval does not require modification (see Judgment 320, under 12, 13 and 17, or more recently Judgments 3171, under 22, and 3239, under 15). Of course, this check must be carried out with particular vigilance when the assessment occurs in a context where it is especially to be feared that the supervisor making it might lack objectivity and, a fortiori, when it takes place, as it did in the instant case, in a situation of overt antagonism (see Judgment 3171, under 23).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 320, 3171, 3239

    Keywords:

    organisation's duties; performance evaluation; performance report; supervisor;



  • Judgment 3678


    122nd Session, 2016
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him at the end of his probation period.

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    It is true that there is no evidence in the file to show that the Organization formally notified the complainant during his probation period that there was an objective risk that his appointment would not be confirmed at the end of that period. However, it is clear from the end-probation period report of November 2013, which was forwarded to him and on which he in fact commented, that his supervisor considered that his performance fell short of the expected level. In addition [...], the complainant was informed on several occasions during his probation period that he was not achieving the objectives which had been set for him in his induction interview. In these circumstances, the complainant must have been aware that he ran a serious risk of not having his appointment confirmed at the end of his probation period.

    Keywords:

    judicial review; organisation's duties; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3652


    122nd Session, 2016
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns two appointment decisions by the Director-General.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The Tribunal’s case law has it that a staff appointment by an international organisation is a decision that lies within the discretion of its executive head. Such a decision is subject to only limited review and may be set aside only if it was taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some material fact was overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if a clearly wrong conclusion was drawn from the evidence (see Judgment 3537, under 10). Nevertheless, anyone who applies for a post to be filled by some process of selection is entitled to have her or his application considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition. That is a right which every applicant must enjoy, whatever her or his hope of success may be (see, inter alia, Judgment 2163, under 1, and the case law cited therein, and Judgment 3209, under 11). It was also stated that an organisation must abide by the rules on selection and, when the process proves to be flawed, the Tribunal can quash any resulting appointment, albeit on the understanding that the organisation must ensure that the successful candidate is shielded from any injury which may result from the cancellation of her or his appointment, which she or he accepted in good faith (see, for example, Judgment 3130, under 10 and 11).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2163, 3130, 3209, 3537

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; organisation's duties; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3650


    122nd Session, 2016
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the refusal to pay her interest on reimbursement of medical costs.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    [T]he breach of a duty to consider and process a claim within a reasonable period would not be founded on an implied right to interest but rather, arguably, should be regarded as damages for the breach of the duty. However, those damages may well prove to be an amount equal to the interest payable on the amounts involved.

    Keywords:

    interest on damages; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3640


    122nd Session, 2016
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the disciplinary measure of his summary dismissal in the wake of a sexual harassment complaint filed against him by one of his colleagues.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The sole purpose of the preliminary assessment of such a complaint is to determine whether there are grounds for opening an investigation. Item 18.2, paragraph 37, of the Human Resources Manual, on the anti-harassment policy, states that in order to justify the opening of an investigation, it is sufficient for the Ethics Adviser to find “that there are reasons to believe that the complaint is founded”. All that is therefore required at this stage is a prima facie finding that the complaint is genuine, since it is in the course of the investigation itself, if opened, that the comprehensive search for evidence must be made.

    Keywords:

    inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3613


    121st Session, 2016
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his employment for alleged unsatisfactory performance, the Global Fund’s refusal to retract a News Release published on the date of the termination of his employment, and the decision to maintain the News Release on the Fund’s website and its refusal to award compensation for excessive publication, defamation and continued breach of privacy.

    Consideration 46

    Extract:

    It is well established in the Tribunal’s case law that “international organisations are bound to refrain from any type of conduct that may harm the dignity or reputation of their staff members” (Judgment 2861, under 91; see also Judgments 396, 1875, 2371, 2475 and 2720).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 396, 1875, 2371, 2475, 2720

    Keywords:

    duty of care; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3579


    121st Session, 2016
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant complains of a breach of his “procedural rights” before the Appeals Board, the discontinuation of two elements of his mobility allowance and harassment.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal finds that, by failing to convene a hearing within the prescribed two-month time limit, the Organization unlawfully disregarded the provisions of paragraph 14 of the Statutes of the Appeals Board, thereby breaching the principle of tu patere legem quam ipse fecisti, which requires every authority to abide by the rules which it has itself established (see, for example, Judgment 3357, under 20).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3357

    Keywords:

    organisation's duties; patere legem;



  • Judgment 3437


    119th Session, 2015
    Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the decision to terminate his contract following the CTA restructuring.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    Precedent has it that international organisations may undertake restructuring entailing the redefinition of posts and staff reductions in order to achieve greater efficiency or budgetary savings (see, for example, Judgments 2156, under 8, or 2510, under 10). However, each and every individual decision adopted in the context of such restructuring must respect all the applicable legal rules and in particular the fundamental rights of the staff concerned (see, for example, Judgments 1614, under 3, 2907, under 13, or 3169, under 7).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1614, 2156, 2510, 2907, 3169

    Keywords:

    organisation's duties; reorganisation;



  • Judgment 3424


    119th Session, 2015
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal found that the impugned implied decision was flawed.

    Consideration 8(b)

    Extract:

    "It is true that the two successive appeals thus lodged by the complainant were not submitted to the authorities competent to hear them. But consistent precedent has it that, although rules of procedure should ordinarily be strictly complied with, they must not set traps for staff members who are defending their rights and therefore they must not be construed with too much formalism. Consequently, an appeal submitted to the wrong authority is not irreceivable on that account and it is for that authority, in such circumstances, to forward it to the one which is competent, within the organisation, to hear it (see, for example, Judgments 1832, under 6, 2882, under 6, or 3027, under 7)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1832, 2882, 3027

    Keywords:

    internal appeal; organisation's duties;

    Consideration 8(a)

    Extract:

    "According to the Tribunal’s case law, for a letter, or an e-mail, addressed to an organisation to constitute an appeal, it is sufficient that the person concerned clearly expresses therein his or her intention to challenge the decision adversely affecting him or her and that the request thus formulated can be granted in some meaningful way (see Judgments 461, under 3, 1172, under 7, 2572, under 9, and 3067, under 16)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 461, 1172, 3067

    Keywords:

    internal appeal; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3394


    119th Session, 2015
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal considered that, by taking it upon itself to interpret Judgment 3119, WIPO breached its duty to execute that judgment fully and correctly.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3119

    Keywords:

    application for execution; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; execution of judgment; organisation's duties; res judicata;



  • Judgment 3392


    118th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal summarily dismissed the applications for interpretation and for review.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The reference in the decision to the shielding of the successful candidate is not ambiguous; the Tribunal deliberately left it to the discretion of WHO as to how it should protect the candidate who had accepted the appointment in good faith. Moreover, the Tribunal notes that the complainant requests clarification of a part of the decision (i.e. the shielding of the successful candidate) that does not affect him directly. The Tribunal therefore sees no reason to interpret the judgment."

    Keywords:

    application for interpretation; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3337


    118th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: Considering that his harassment complaint has not been treated within a reasonable time, the complainant asks the Tribunal to sanction the Organisation for breach of its duty of care.

    Considerations 11-12

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal has consistently stressed the serious nature of allegations of harassment in the workplace and the need for international organisations to investigate such allegations promptly and thoroughly. This is a function of the organisation’s duty of care to its staff members to uphold their dignity. [...] It is in relation to this obligation that the Tribunal, in Judgment 3069, under 12, for example, stated that international organisations have to ensure that an internal body that is charged with investigating and reporting on claims of harassment is properly functioning."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3069

    Keywords:

    disciplinary procedure; evidence; harassment; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3314


    117th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant requests compensation for the injury arising from inaction and delay by the Administration in pursuing her harassment complaint.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The Tribunal’s case law requires an international organization to investigate allegations of harassment linked to the workplace thoroughly, in accordance with due process and the protection of the person accused. The investigation should be prompt and thorough; the facts determined objectively and in their overall context; the law is to be applied correctly and the person claiming, in good faith, to have been harassed, should not be stigmatised or victimized on that account. (See, for example, Judgment 2973, under 16.) An international organization is also required to ensure that its investigative and internal appeal bodies for this purpose are functioning properly. (See, for example, Judgment 3069, under 12.)

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2973, 3069

    Keywords:

    harassment; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 3302


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complaints were dismissed for non-exhaustion of internal remedies under Article 7 of the Tribunal’s Rules.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2780, 2811, 2939

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; decision; delay; duty of care; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation's duties; reasonable time; staff member's duties;



  • Judgment 3295


    116th Session, 2014
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complaint concerning a disciplinary measure was dismissed by the Tribunal on the grounds that he had not demonstrated the existence of an error warranting the cancellation of the sanction.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "It is true that an organisation should investigate allegations of misconduct in a timely manner both in the interests of the person being investigated and the organisation. These interests include, among other things, safeguarding the reputations of both parties and ensuring that evidence is not lost."

    Keywords:

    consequence; delay; duty of care; evidence; inquiry; investigation; misconduct; organisation's duties;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The complainant also takes the position that PAHO failed to give him a warning or the opportunity to correct the situation prior to bringing disciplinary action. In Judgment 1661, under 3, the Tribunal framed an organisation’s obligations in the following terms: “Before an organisation imposes a disciplinary penalty such as dismissal it must warn the staff member and give him the opportunity not only of stating his own case but also of refuting the organisation’s: in other words, there must be due process. So he must be told of the charges and of the evidence against him. If the proceedings are to be properly adversarial, he must be free to give his own version of the facts, refute that evidence, adduce his own, take part in the discussion of it, and at least once crossquestion the expert and other witnesses. See, for example, Judgments 512 […] under 5; 907 […] under 4; 999 […] under 5; 1082 […] under 18; 1133 […] under 7; 1212 […] under 3; 1228 […] under 4; 1251 […] under 8; 1384 […] under 5, 10 and 15; 1395 […] under 6; 1484 […] under 7 and 8.”"

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 512, 907, 999, 1082, 1133, 1212, 1228, 1251, 1384, 1395, 1484, 1661

    Keywords:

    case law; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; due process; inquiry; investigation; misconduct; organisation's duties; right to reply; summary dismissal; termination of employment;



  • Judgment 3290


    116th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: Following the abolition of the complainant's post for lack of financial resources, the reassignment process was organized but was ultimately unsuccessful in finding the complainant another post.

    Consideration 30

    Extract:

    "[W]ith respect to the reassignment process itself, as part of its obligation to make reasonable efforts to find a suitable post for the complainant, [the organisation] ought to have enquired whether the complainant was willing to accept a post at a lower grade than the one he held (see Judgment 2830, under 9)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830

    Keywords:

    grade; organisation's duties; post held by the complainant; reassignment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; complaint allowed; delay; fixed-term; grade; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity; termination of employment;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >


 
Last updated: 24.09.2024 ^ top