Contract (292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 661, 660, 686, 309, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 648, 654, 671,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Contract
Total judgments found: 428
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 | next >
Judgment 2018
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
The decision not to confirm the complainant's appointment after a probationary period and to terminate his employment prior to the expiry of his fixed-term contract is quashed. "The complainant is entitled to be reinstated in his post or in one of an equivalent grade with full salary and benefits (including any salary increases which he would have received if he had not been terminated) to the end of his fixed-term appointment."
Keywords:
allowance; condition; contract; date; fixed-term; grade; increase; post; post held by the complainant; probationary period; reconstruction of career; refusal; reinstatement; right; salary; termination of employment;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant's appointment was not confirmed after a probationary period and his employment was terminated before the expiry of his fixed-term contract. "The Tribunal finds that the Staff Regulations, Rules and Administrative Directives in force at the time do not contain specific provisions for the non-confirmation of fixed-term appointments during or at the end of a probationary period. The provisions relating to the termination of fixed-term appointments without probationary periods therefore apply."
Keywords:
administrative instruction; analogy; applicable law; contract; fixed-term; no provision; probationary period; refusal; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;
Considerations 14-15
Extract:
The complainant attacks the decision not to confirm his appointment after a probationary period and to terminate his employment prior to the expiry of his fixed-term contract. "The Tribunal [...] notes that [...] the organisation's legal division advised the administration of the procedure to be followed in terminating the complainant's appointment. Specifically [...] the administration was advised of its obligation to set up a special advisory board to investigate the case and to report back to the Director-General. This advice, like the [...] findings of the Special Advisory Board, appear inexplicably to have been simply ignored by the Director-General. In the circumstances, the impugned decision [...] must be quashed."
Keywords:
advisory body; advisory opinion; contract; decision quashed; executive head; fixed-term; organisation's duties; probationary period; procedure before the tribunal; refusal; termination of employment;
Judgment 2017
90th Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2(A)
Extract:
"The complainant enjoyed the status of official from October 1974 to the end of December 1992. From 1 January 1993 to 31 December 1994 he was employed on the basis of special agreements, which contained an arbitration clause providing for an "arbitral panel" composed of three members. The Tribunal's jurisdiction is therefore limited to the effects of the relationship between the [organisation] and the complainant from October 1974 to the end of December 1992."
Keywords:
arbitration; competence of tribunal; contract; date; external collaborator; limits; ratione personae; status of complainant;
Judgment 1964
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"It is within the competence of the Tribunal to determine whether or not there is a contract of appointment by which the parties are bound and which would entitle the official covered by the contract to the rights enjoyed by the officials of an organisation that has recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction. However, in the material case, the [organisation's] agreement to appoint the complainant was subject to the fulfilment of a condition which cannot be said to be a mere formality, namely, recognition that he was physically fit enough to discharge his functions. [...] Consequently, the complainant, who has never been an employee of the [organisation], is raising a matter which is not within the scope of the Tribunal's competence."
Keywords:
appointment; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; condition; contract; locus standi; medical examination; non official; offer; offer withdrawn; official; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; tribunal;
Judgment 1938
88th Session, 2000
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant worked continuously for the organization for 17 years under various short term contracts - including contractual service agreements - after his fixed-term appointment as a staff member expired. "In practice he is seeking to obtain a revision of the whole of his career from 1976 to 1996. But he himself accepted the contractual conditions offered to him. He did not challenge the decision taken in 1979 not to renew his fixed-term appointment and not to convert it into a permanent appointment. Moreover, he offers no legally valid argument to challenge the way he has been treated since 1979. His claims must therefore be dismissed [...]."
Keywords:
complainant; contract; duration of appointment; external collaborator; fixed-term; locus standi; project personnel;
Judgment 1911
88th Session, 2000
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
"It is a general principle of the international civil service that there must be a valid reason for any decision not to renew a fixed-term contract and that the reason must be given to the staff member [...]. An official whose fixed-term contract is reaching expiry must be informed in a timely manner of the real reasons for the decision not to renew it [...]. In this case a mere reference to a letter sent to the complainant nearly two years previously cannot, in the absence of any other indication as to the real reasons for the decision to be taken, exempt the observatory from stating the grounds clearly."
Keywords:
contract; date; decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; general principle; grounds; international civil service principles; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; separation from service;
Judgment 1906
88th Session, 2000
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant argues that, since none of [the instances of insubordination and improper activity which were noted by the organization] was ever made the object of disciplinary proceedings against him, they cannot be invoked as reasons in support of the decision not to renew his contract. The complainant is wrong. An organization is never under an obligation to launch disciplinary proceedings against a staff member and, where that person's appointment is drawing to an end, the fact that there are possible disciplinary infractions on his part may properly be considered when the administration is deciding whether or not to offer him a new contract."
Keywords:
contract; disciplinary procedure; grounds; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; separation from service;
Judgment 1888
87th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The Tribunal's jurisdiction is limited to the review of administrative decisions taken by international organisations affecting the employment conditions of their employees. Where such decisions are found to be reviewable and where they have caused harm, the Tribunal will exercise its jurisdiction to order reparation thereof. The Tribunal is not, however, a civil court of general jurisdiction in matters of delict and contract. Even where they may be causally related to injury suffered by someone, prejudice and malfeasance do not give rise to a claim for damages before the Tribunal unless they can be related to a specific administrative decision which has become final and against which the complainant has exhausted all available internal remedies."
Keywords:
bias; compensation; competence of tribunal; contract; decision; injury; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; limits; material damages; moral injury; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1886
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9(2)
Extract:
"The fact of accepting the offer of a new contract of indefinite duration cannot deprive the complainant of the rights he acquired whilst he was in the service of the [organisation] under successive fixed-term contracts."
Keywords:
acquired right; continuance of operations; contract; fixed-term; offer; permanent appointment; successive contracts;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant accepted an offer for a permanent contract which provided that the contract would be governed by the Staff Rules and Regulations valid as of 1 January 1997 (which would reduce his expatriation allowance). "By confining himself to the phrase 'without prejudice of my acquired rights', the complainant showed that he had no reason in principle to refuse the offer made to him, but that he merely wished to maintain his right to continue receiving the expatriation allowance at the former rate [...]. [I]n view of the above, and the fact that the [organisation] neither modified, nor proposed to modify its offer, despite the complainant's reservation, it has to be deduced that the employment relationship between the complainant and the [organisation] is based on a contract concluded after 1 January 1997. It is therefore a priori governed by the Staff Rules and Regulations which were in force at that date [...]."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; contract; date; effective date; intention of parties; non-resident allowance; offer; permanent appointment; rate; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1883
87th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
"The complainant contests [the non-renewal of his contract] by a motion for an interlocutory order, [he] seeks preliminary injunctive relief to force the organization to place him on unpaid leave of absence and to offer him contract work as available. [T]o allow the motion would of necessity decide the principal issue in the complaint which is before the Tribunal on the merits. The requested injunction would have the effect of altering the status quo. The reply raises serious issues which should only be determined on the merits." The Tribunal adds that "the allegation of irreparable harm is unconvincing" [and that] "the balance of hardships favours the organization."
Keywords:
compensation; contract; interlocutory order; non-renewal of contract; order;
Judgment 1854
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15, 17 and 18
Extract:
The post of the complainant (employed on a permanent contract) was abolished and replaced by a new one of higher level, the functions of which however remained substantially similar to those of the previous post. "By changing the requirements [the organisation] manifested its desire to have those functions performed by a person with higher academic or professional qualifications, but it does not prove that the complainant, who had twenty-eight years of experience with the [organisation], was unable to perform them. [T]he complainant has [...] shown that, prima facie, the functions of the new post were substantially similar to his post, and within his capabilities [...] on the other hand, the [organisation] has failed to prove that the new post did have greater responsibilities; or that it was higher in grade than the old one; or that its greater responsibilities were recognised by way of higher remuneration. [I]n the circumstances, the Tribunal holds that there was no genuine suppression of the complainant's post, and that the termination of his contract was caused mainly by an unjustified loss of confidence in him by the administrator."
Keywords:
abolition of post; contract; grade; permanent appointment; post; professional experience; training;
Judgment 1845
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"Under Article II(6) of its Statute the Tribunal is open to a former staff member. However, Article II(5) restricts the competence of the Tribunal, ratione materiae, to complaints alleging the non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of a staff member or of the provisions of the applicable staff regulations. On expiry of the complainant's contract, he ceased to be a staff member. His complaint, concerning his non-selection [to the post of assistant to the head of administration] does not involve any allegation of the violation of any rights which he enjoyed under his contract or the Staff Regulations insofar as they continued to apply to him. The Tribunal therefore [cannot] entertain the complaint."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II (5) OFTHE STATUTE;
ARTICLE II (6) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
candidate; competence of tribunal; competition; contract; enforcement; external candidate; iloat statute; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; separation from service; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1817
86th Session, 1999
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The case law says that an organisation may not take unilateral action that affects status before giving the staff member the opportunity of answering (see Judgment 1484 [...]). And that rule applies, of course, to dismissal of a probationer."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1484
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; contract; organisation's duties; probationary period; right to reply; termination of employment;
Judgment 1807
86th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The organisation submits that the contract signed by the complainant was a new contract, not an extension of the old one, since his status had shifted from "paid associate" to "international staff member". So he was not entitled to the protection of acquired rights bestowed by an internal memorandum. According to the Tribunal, "the contract which [the complainant] was offered [...] and which he signed [in October 1995] was not his first fixed-term contract, since he had begun at the [organisation] in 1991 under a fixed-term one that it had renewed more than once. nor was it a new, indefinite contract, since [...] his last contract was a fixed-term one for three years. Under his earlier contracts he was a staff member".
Keywords:
acquired right; contract; extension of contract; fixed-term; official; permanent appointment; successive contracts;
Judgment 1791
86th Session, 1999
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 13-14
Extract:
"The complainants plead breach of their acquired rights [...]. [T]hey argue that those terms are inviolate, particularly the clauses on pay. [...] The financial crisis [facing the Organization] at the material time did amount to exceptional circumstances that warranted the slight reduction in pay that [the Organization] applied, for only one year anyway and in consideration for extra time off."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; budgetary reasons; compensatory leave; contract; exception; proportionality; provisional decision; reduction of salary; salary; terms of appointment;
Judgment 1783
85th Session, 1998
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"When the Tribunal quashes a flawed decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment it has discretion as to the relief it grants. It may send the case back for a new decision by the Organisation on renewal [...] but if it considers that renewal would be only fair, it will, instead of ordering a new decision, actually order reinstatement under a new contract for an appropriate term. [...] But if it considers neither a new decision nor reinstatement to be possible or advisable, it may, as authorised by Article VIII of its Statute, award the complainant compensation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
allowance; application for execution; case sent back to organisation; compensation; contract; decision quashed; duration of appointment; effect; fixed-term; iloat statute; judgment of the tribunal; non-renewal of contract; reinstatement; subsidiary;
Judgment 1782
85th Session, 1998
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"What [Staff Rule 110.02 a) on abolition of posts and staff reduction] entitles staff members with permanent appointments to is preference to 'suitable posts in which their services can be effectively utilized', and that means posts not just at the same grade but even at a lower one. [...] The Advisory Group should have asked the complainant [who held grade G.7] at the outset whether she would accept a G.6 post. Because it failed to do so, it considered her for vacant posts at G.7 only and deprived her of the opportunity of being considered for G.6 vacancies." See also Judgment 346 [...].
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNIDO'S STAFF RULE 110.02 A)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 346
Keywords:
abolition of post; contract; duration of appointment; grade; organisation's duties; permanent appointment; post; priority; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
Judgment 1775
85th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
According to the complainant, the way he accepted the offer of employment did form a binding contract. The Tribunal considers that "[the complainant] must show an unqualified agreement and meeting of minds between the Organization and himself on the essential terms of a contract of employment. The Tribunal is unable to read [a telex from the complainant to the Organization] as anything but a counter-offer on one of the most essential terms of the proposed contract, namely remuneration. Certainly, it cannot be said to be an unqualified acceptance and the fact that it is couched in terms of a claim of right does nothing to change its character; a potential employee does not have an automatic right to any particular grade or step and an offer which specifies one figure of salary cannot be accepted by a claim to a higher figure: see Judgment 228 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 228
Keywords:
acceptance; case law; contract; grade; offer; right; salary; step;
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant claims that a binding contract did exist between the Organization and himself, despite the silence of the Organization on his counter-offer regarding the amount of his salary. The Tribunal considers that "[it cannot] be said that the Organization's reply [...] constituted by its silence on that score an acceptance of the complainant's counter-offer. Silence does not normally imply consent and the circumstances here are not such as to give rise to any inference in the complainant's favour; the terms of the Organization's [reply] are fully compatible with the conclusion that the question of salary was still unresolved and subject to further negotiation."
Keywords:
acceptance; contract; failure to answer claim; offer; salary;
Judgment 1773
85th Session, 1998
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
"The [Organization] argues that the Tribunal is not competent to hear [the complaints]. In its submission [the] contract of employment [signed by the complainant] does not vest competence in the Tribunal but expressly provides for arbitration over any dispute. In the circumstances of the case the plea cannot succeed. The [Organization refused the complainant's] request for arbitration. Although there was no express provision vesting competence in the Tribunal to hear the dispute between the Organization and the complainant, it employed him, paid his salary and terminated his appointment. There is therefore no denying the Tribunal's competence by virtue of the general terms of Article II of its Statute. Such denial would mean either that no court at all had jurisdiction or that the case must go to the [national] courts, to whose jurisdiction the [Organization] declines to submit."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
arbitration; competence of tribunal; contract; declaration of recognition; iloat statute; municipal court; right of appeal;
Judgment 1756
85th Session, 1998
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"A firm line of precedent says that rights under a contract of employment may be express or implied, and include any that flow from general principles of the international civil service or human rights [...]."
Keywords:
applicable law; case law; contract; general principle; international civil service principles;
Judgment 1750
85th Session, 1998
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"A steady line of precedent does indeed have it that non-renewal and valid reasons for it must be duly notified so that the staff member may act accordingly and in particular exercise the right of appeal [...]. The case law does not require that the reasons be stated in the text that gives notice of non-renewal."
Keywords:
case law; contract; decision; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; non-renewal of contract; right of appeal;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 | next >
|
