Duty to substantiate decision (30,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Duty to substantiate decision
Total judgments found: 134
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
Judgment 1128
71st Session, 1991
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
As stated in Judgment 675, "an international organisation is under an obligation to consider whether or not it is in its interests to renew a contract and to make a decision accordingly: though such a decision is discretionary, it may not 'be arbitrary or irrational'; there 'must be a good reason for it and the reason must be given'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 675
Keywords:
contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; limits; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; organisation's interest;
Judgment 1123
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
The complainant seeks the quashing of a 1.53 per cent "reduction" applied to his pay in pursuance of a decision by Eurocontrol's Permanent Commission to bring in a 5 per cent differential between pay in the European Communities and within the organisation. The Tribunal holds that "the objection that there has been no statement of the reasons is unsound: the staff have known all along the reasons for the adjustments, which have been fully discussed in the context of the cases. There was therefore no need to state reasons for the individual decisions [...]. The Tribunal may [not] review the reasons of policy underlying the general decision." Besides, the reasons fall within the ambit of Article 65.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 65 OF THE EUROCONTROL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
adjustment; competence of tribunal; duty to substantiate decision; general decision; grounds; individual decision; judicial review; reduction of salary; salary;
Judgment 1118
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 18-19
Extract:
The complainants seek the quashing of a 1.25 per cent "reduction" in the repayment of education expenses in keeping with a decision taken by Eurocontrol's Permanent Commission to bring in a 5 per cent differential between net pay at Eurocontrol and net pay in the European Communities. The Tribunal holds that "the objection that there has been no statement of the reasons is unsound: the staff have known all along the reasons for the adjustments, which have been fully discussed in the context of the cases. There was therefore no need to state reasons for the individual decisions [...]. The Tribunal may [not] review the reasons of policy underlying the general decision." Besides, the reasons fall within the ambit of Article 65.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 65 OF THE EUROCONTROL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
adjustment; competence of tribunal; duty to substantiate decision; education expenses; general decision; grounds; individual decision; judicial review; reduction of salary; refund; salary;
Judgment 1113
71st Session, 1991
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
After carrying out a staff review, the organization confirmed the grading of the complainant's post at grade G.5. "The reasons for CERN's decision in this case are evident from the file, the implication in the words used being that it accepted the 'views and recommendations' on the file that there should be no upgrading."
Keywords:
advisory opinion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; judicial review; post classification; recommendation;
Judgment 1096
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
In Judgment 963 the Tribunal set aside in part an initial reduction in the rate of refund of educational expenses at Eurocontrol insofar as the reduction was given retroactive effect. The present complaints challenge the second reduction. Recalling a recurring principle in the case law (see Judgments 726 and 825) that "a reduction in pay may not be so great as to disrupt the structure of the terms of appointment and that there must be sound reasons for it", the Tribunal orders further submissions in which the defendant organisation shall explain in greater detail the favourable effects of the measure.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 726, 825, 963
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; education expenses; further submissions; interlocutory order; reduction of salary; refund; salary;
Judgment 1054
69th Session, 1990
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 21
Extract:
"The staff member needs to know the grounds for the decision* so that he can defend his rights and interests [...]. What is more, the reasons need to be known for the purposes of judicial review".
*The decision in question is the rejection of the complainants' applications for "early departure".
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; early retirement; grounds; judicial review; purpose; refusal; retirement;
Consideration 22
Extract:
"The substance of the obligation [to state the reasons for a decision] will vary with circumstances. iI will not be the same when the decision is general as when it is individual; when management has some degree of discretion as when its authority is circumscribed; when the decision may be adverse as when it is [...] intended to bestow a benefit."
Keywords:
discretion; duty to substantiate decision; general decision; individual decision;
Consideration 23
Extract:
"In these cases the burden of CERN's obligation was at its lightest since the benefits [the complainants were denied] of early departure were conferred ex gratia and the purpose of the scheme was to meet a need for structural reform which the organization is the sole judge of. Yet it did not discharge even that minimal obligation. And its omission is compounded by its failure to keep its explicit promise to give every unsuccessful applicant a written explanation".
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; early retirement; grounds; material damages; promise; refusal;
Judgment 958
66th Session, 1989
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Unless there is express derogation the rule is that the organisation need not, if that is not its practice, state the reasons for all its decisions: what matters is that the absence of a statement should not be to the staff member's detriment."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; duty to substantiate decision; injury; lack of injury; selection board;
Judgment 946
65th Session, 1988
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As a rule the reasons for any administrative decision must be stated. Non-renewal is plainly a decision of great consequence to a staff member and, though the Director-General is free to make his own assessment of the material facts, the staff member is entitled to know the reasons for the Director-General's conclusion so that he may, if he chooses, lodge first an internal appeal and then, if need be, a complaint with the Tribunal."
Keywords:
contract; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract;
Considerations 4-6
Extract:
"In this case the decision not to renew the complainant's appointment was tainted with several fatal flaws. First, the decision was not taken by the competent authority. [...] What was even more serious was the failure to inform the complainant of the reasons for the decision."
Keywords:
competence; contract; decision-maker; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; flaw; grounds; non-renewal of contract; right to reply;
Judgment 936
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"The conclusion is that the Council's approval of the new scales is null and void for two reasons: because no reasons for it are stated, and because it takes into account a factor, the Dutch levy, that the rules in force in the organisation do not provide for."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; breach; decision; deduction; duty to substantiate decision; executive body; grounds; provision; reduction of salary; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules; written rule;
Judgment 901
64th Session, 1988
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Even where termination before expiry is due to the necessities of the service there must be explanation and justification of the decision because it amounts to unilateral breach of the contract. The Director-General does not then have the discretionary authority he may exercise on expiry and, for one thing, the Tribunal will consider whether the decision serves the organisation's interests, as it should."
Keywords:
contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; judicial review; organisation's interest; termination of employment;
Judgment 899
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
In regard to the Dutch levy issue, "since no reasons were given for the impugned decisions there was breach of Article 106(1) of the Service Regulations which requires that the decision 'state the grounds on which it was based'."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 106, PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
decision; deduction; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; reduction of salary; salary;
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Besides safeguarding the staff member's interests, the requirement [that the grounds on which a decision is based should be stated] enables the Tribunal to review, something it cannot do properly when the purpose and legal basis of the decision and the reasons underlying it are unexplained."
Keywords:
decision; duty to substantiate decision; judicial review; purpose;
Judgment 751
59th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The plea that no reasons were given for the impugned decision is also unsound. There can be no obligation whatever on the EPO to state its reasons for introducing scales approved by the Council. Such a decision finds its justification quite simply in the administration's position of subordination to the Council."
Keywords:
administrative instruction; amendment to the rules; decision; duty to substantiate decision; enforcement; executive body; general decision; provision; salary; scale;
Judgment 703
57th Session, 1985
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Though a seconded official holds a fixed-term appointment his position is out of the ordinary. He cannot expect his contract to last more than two years unless the organisations decide differently. But on leaving the receiving organisation he goes back to the releasing one [...] It is therefore only reasonable that either organisation should have the right to end the secondment if it so wishes on the expiry of the prescribed period without having to explain its decision."
Keywords:
consequence; contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reinstatement; secondment;
Judgment 675
56th Session, 1985
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Having served the organization since 1969, the complainant was seconded for two years to the UNDP in 1980. In 1982 the organization decided not to extend the appointment or the secondment. The Tribunal holds that the organization committed an error of law by assuming that a fixed-term appointment expires automatically on the specified expiration date, and an abuse of power for having terminated the complainant without stating its reasons. The award of damages reflects the especially grave moral injury sustained by the complainant.
Keywords:
abuse of power; contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; flaw; legitimate expectation; misuse of authority; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; secondment;
Judgment 631
54th Session, 1984
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 28
Extract:
The complainant retains his P.6 grade on a personal basis, but is transferred, without reasons having been given, to a P.5 post. The Tribunal regards this as downgrading of function. "There is [...] much to be said for the argument that, whether or not there is a specific provision in the Staff Rules, as a matter of contractual obligation the administration ought not to take a decision injuriously affecting a staff member's career without first, as a matter of natural justice, giving him the reasons for the decision and getting his response."
Keywords:
downgrading; duty to substantiate decision; grade; organisation's duties; post; professional injury; transfer;
Judgment 592
51st Session, 1983
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"An organisation may not get rid of a [fixed-term] staff member as it pleases, and without stating reasons, when the period of his appointment expires. It must take care that its decision suffers from none of the defects which entitle the Tribunal to set it aside."
Keywords:
contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 544
50th Session, 1983
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The organization "is disregarding the restrictions on the Director-General's authority. It believes that the Director-General need provide no justification for not extending a fixed-term appointment. Not only did it fail to inform the complainant, at least in writing, of the reasons for the decision but it has said nothing whatever about them in the course of the present proceedings. In short, it acts as if the Director-General were free from any review of the exercise of his authority. It is not so. The non-renewal was therefore tainted with a mistake of law and should be quashed."
Keywords:
contract; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; flaw; judicial review; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 540
49th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Staff Rules impose a duty on the organization to provide a staff member with clear and precise information on all charges of which he is accused. In particular the complainant should have been informed of the period during which the WHO alleges he submitted medical and education grant claims supported by forged or false documents. "It is not difficult to conceive of cases in which such an omission would constitute an irreparable flaw in the procedure laid down". In the particular circumstances of this case, the Tribunal did not find that there had been a breach of the Rules.
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; education expenses; medical expenses; misrepresentation; refund; request by a party; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
Considerations
Extract:
"Even assuming that [the rule which imposes on the Organization a duty to provide clear and precise information on the charges] was not fully complied with, the evidence which emerged before the Regional Board was so overwhelming that it cannot be said that there has been any miscarriage of justice."
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; evidence; exception; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
Judgment 539
49th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Vide Judgment 540, consideration on the procedural point.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 540
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
Considerations
Extract:
Vide Judgment 540, consideration on the procedural point, paragraph 4.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 540
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; evidence; exception; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
Judgment 536
49th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The rule in Article VI[2] of the Statute that the reasons for a judgment shall be stated derives from a general principle. What is required is that the decision, be it to dismiss or to allow the complaint, should follow a line of reasoning which bears out the Tribunal's conclusions. The judgment deals with all the pleas put forward by the parties either by dealing with them on the merits or else by declaring them irrelevant or irreceivable. The parties cannot require the Tribunal to address itself to the merits of arguments which have no bearing on its decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VI, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 404, 442
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; judgment of the tribunal;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
|
