General decision (33,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: General decision
Total judgments found: 145
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
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;
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
The organisation submits that the Tribunal is not competent to entertain a challenge to measures taken by the Permanent Commission, which is a legislative body. "An organisation may of course freely decide what its staff regulations are to say and what the structure of its secretariat is to be. But once it has laid those administrative foundations the political and administrative bodies that frame personnel policy have a duty as employer at all times and more particularly when amending conditions of service to abide by [the] general principles [of the international civil service]. As it stated in Judgment 986 [...], under 2, the Tribunal is fully competent when the relationship between the organisation and its staff is at issue, subject only to Article XII of its Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE XII OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 986
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; enforcement; executive body; general decision; international civil service principles; legislative body; organisation's duties;
Judgment 1101
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainants, who are employees of Eurocontrol, seek the quashing of an Office Notice insofar as it informs staff that expenses arising from trace-element therapy (oligo-elements), aromatherapy and phytotherapy are not to be refunded. The Agency pleas that the complaint is irreceivable. "It is worth pointing out that in Judgment 961 [...] of 27 June 1989 the Tribunal held that it was 'competent only to entertain individual and actual disputes' and would not make prior rulings of general purport. Again in Judgment 1081 [...] of 29 January 1991 it affirmed that no appeal would lie against a general decision provided that it was such as needed in all cases to be followed by a challengeable individual one."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 961, 1081
Keywords:
administrative instruction; cause of action; competence of tribunal; general decision; health insurance; individual decision; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; refund; refusal;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainants are challenging an Office Notice that merely informs them that expenses incurred for certain forms of treatment will not be refunded. "There will be a decision challengeable under Article VII of the Tribunal's Statute only when Eurocontrol has, in accordance with its rules, refused a staff member refund of the cost of a particular sort of treatment. The Tribunal will then rule according to the criteria it stated in Judgment 1088 of 29 January 1991, taking medical advice if need be. It may not make a prior ruling of general application to the sorts of treatment covered by the Office Notice."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1088
Keywords:
administrative instruction; competence of tribunal; general decision; health insurance; individual decision; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; refund;
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
The complainants are challenging a general decision. They "cannot yet show any cause of action and their complaints must fail because they are irreceivable. [...] Since, however, before altering its stand the organisation directly encouraged them to file the present complaints, it is only reasonable that it should bear the costs".
Keywords:
cause of action; costs; exception; general decision; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1081
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The fact "that the measure under challenge affects several groups of staff and is therefore general in purport [...] does not in itself make the complaints irreceivable: decisions do not need to be individual to be challengeable before the Tribunal. As Article VII(2) of the Tribunal's Statute makes plain, a general decision too is challengeable. That article sets the time limit for filing a complaint against 'a decision affecting a class of officials', in other words a general decision. Yet that does not mean that a complaint challenging any sort of general decision will necessarily be receivable: there is also the rule in VII(1) that the internal means of redress must have been exhausted."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) AND (2) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; condition; date; general decision; iloat statute; individual decision; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainants want to have the revised weighings with retroactive force from 1 January 1981 taken into account for determination of the "Eurocontrol reduction" imposed on their salaries. The impugned decision does not "put figures on the entitlements of each of the complainants it applies to. [...] In the circumstances the complainants may not now challenge the validity of the general decision they are objecting to. Before they come to the Tribunal they must be able to cite individual decisions."
Keywords:
adjustment; cost-of-living weighting; general decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint; reckoning; reduction of salary; salary;
Judgment 1054
69th Session, 1990
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
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;
Judgment 1012
68th Session, 1990
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The decision to reduce pay at Eurocontrol was confirmed on 12 November 1987. "Though the pay slips [giving effect to the reduction] are plainly unlawful because the Commission's decision still had to come into effect, they apply only to the period they cover and cannot be treated as giving effect to a decision that had not yet become final. Not a single complainant has challenged an individual decision subsequent to 12 November 1987. The Tribunal is therefore bound, regrettably, to declare the claims irreceivable insofar as they object to future reductions in pay."
Keywords:
application for quashing; effective date; enforcement; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; salary;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"In line with the principles the Tribunal affirmed in Judgments 624 and 902 the complainants may challenge the Director General's decisions to apply the general measures to them and may thereby also challenge the lawfulness of the commission's decisions. [...] The defendant's objections to receivability fail insofar as they relate to the pay slips the complainants received in July, August and September 1987" and which informed them of reductions made to their salary.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 624, 902
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1001
68th Session, 1990
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"When impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; decision-maker; general decision; inquiry; investigation; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; salary;
Judgment 1000
68th Session, 1990
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
See Judgment 1001, consideration 12.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1001
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; decision-maker; general decision; inquiry; investigation; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; salary;
Judgment 963
66th Session, 1989
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainants received notification in their pay slips of a 0.7 per cent reduction in the refundable amount of education expenses which they had incurred. The organisation contends that the pay slips merely confirmed earlier decisions, viz. a general decision of 7 July 1987. The Tribunal holds that the impugned decisions were individual ones that cause the complainants injury, and not confirmations of earlier decisions.
Keywords:
cause of action; confirmatory decision; decision; deduction; education expenses; general decision; individual decision; payslip; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; refund; salary;
Judgment 961
66th Session, 1989
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4, Summary
Extract:
The Permanent Commission of Eurocontrol took a decision of policy to bring about a differential of up to 5 per cent between staff pensions in the European Communities and pensions in Eurocontrol. The complainants are challenging a general decision, not individual decisions. Not one of the complainants has retired. "Since the amount of the complainants' pension contributions is not under challenge, all that is material in this case is the amount each complainant will get when he retires. The Tribunal will not make a general ruling, being competent only to entertain individual and actual disputes, and it therefore declares the complaints irreceivable."
Keywords:
cause of action; competence of tribunal; general decision; individual decision; legislative body; pension; pension entitlements; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary;
Judgment 936
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"The decisions determining the complainants' pay are [...] void because they rest on an invalid general decision of the Council's."
Keywords:
consequence; decision; executive body; flaw; general decision; individual decision; judicial review;
Judgment 902
64th Session, 1988
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
"The only kind of decision against which appeal will lie to the Tribunal [is] one taken by the appointing authority, and whether it is individual or general, express or implied, does not matter."
Keywords:
complaint; condition; decision; express decision; general decision; implied decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint;
Consideration 27
Extract:
"If a staff member [...] lodges an appeal under the Staff Regulations he may thereby also challenge the lawfulness of any decision of the Permanent Commission's that affords the legal basis for the individual decision by the appointing authority if he alleges breach of the rules and principles of the international civil service that are binding on the organisation. As the Tribunal says in Judgment 899 [...], under 19, an organisation may not cite its own decision-making procedures to avoid compliance with the rules in dealings with staff."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 899
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; enforcement; general decision; international civil service principles; legislative body; organisation's duties;
Judgment 899
64th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
"The EPO's replies to the complaints are perfunctory. [The organisation] merely cites the policy of one of the seven chosen countries and the Council's posture without actually addressing the objective criteria applied in reckoning pay and working out the scale.* Not by submissions of that kind may it avoid compliance with the rules in dealings with staff. It is preventing the Tribunal from determining the ambit of the dispute and exercising its power of review."
*the material issue is the impact on EPO salaries of a deduction levied on salaries in the Dutch civil service.
Keywords:
deduction; general decision; organisation's duties; reduction of salary; salary;
Judgment 847
63rd Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant claims that Circular 144 on the reckoning of seniority for promotion should be withdrawn. The claim is irreceivable inasmuch as "the complainant is not challenging an individual decision but objecting to certain general rules in the Circular. As the Tribunal has held before - for example in Judgment 625 [...] - a complaint impugning a general decision against which no direct internal appeal will lie is irreceivable until individual decisions are taken on the strength of the general decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 625
Keywords:
administrative instruction; application for quashing; competence of tribunal; general decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 832
62nd Session, 1987
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
As a result of the adoption of a new scale of pensionable remuneration, Article 3.1.1 of the ILO Staff Regulations was amended. "The complainants' case does not rest on breach of any term of their contracts or of any provision of the Staff Regulations. What they are saying is that as applied to them Article 3.1.1 of the Regulations impairs their acquired rights. Their complaints will therefore be receivable if the application of 3.1.1 does cause them injury."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 3.1.1 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; cause of action; competence of tribunal; condition; enforcement; general decision; individual decision; injury; pension; pensionable remuneration; provision; receivability of the complaint; scale; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 831
62nd Session, 1987
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"Whether or not the decision [of the International Civil Service Commission] is put into the Staff Regulations is immaterial: be that as it may it is binding on the Director-General only if lawful."
Keywords:
binding character; condition; enforcement; executive head; general decision; icsc decision; judicial review;
Judgment 830
62nd Session, 1987
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
See Judgment 831, consideration 18.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 831
Keywords:
binding character; condition; enforcement; executive head; general decision; icsc decision; judicial review;
Judgment 829
62nd Session, 1987
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
Vide Judgment 831, consideration 18.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 831
Keywords:
binding character; condition; enforcement; executive head; general decision; icsc decision; judicial review;
Judgment 827
62nd Session, 1987
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
See Judgment 831, consideration 18.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 831
Keywords:
binding character; condition; enforcement; executive head; general decision; icsc decision; judicial review;
Judgment 826
62nd Session, 1987
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
See Judgment 831, consideration 18.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 831
Keywords:
binding character; condition; enforcement; executive head; general decision; icsc decision; judicial review;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >
|
