Separation from service (378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 649, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Separation from service
Total judgments found: 99
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
Judgment 2582
102nd Session, 2007
International Olive Oil Council
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The IOOC recognised the Tribunal's competence by a letter of 19 September 2003 addressed to the Director-General of the International Labour Office (ILO). "Although the complainant's appointment with the IOOC ended prior to that recognition, which was approved by the ILO's Governing Body at its 288th Session in November 2003, the Tribunal considers that it may properly hear the present case brought by a former official of the IOOC who, subsequently to that recognition, has alleged a breach of statutory provisions."
Keywords:
breach; competence of tribunal; complaint; date; declaration of recognition; executive body; executive head; provision; separation from service; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2531
101st Session, 2006
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"A question remains as to whether the complainant was given sufficient notice of the Organization's intention not to renew his contract. Precedent has it that staff on short-term contracts are entitled, before any decision is taken not to extend or renew their appointment, to 'reasonable notice', particularly so that they may exercise their right to appeal and take whatever action may be necessary. It is true that in this case the short-term Staff Rules do not require any notice, except in the event of termination (when notice is limited to seven days), which does not apply in this case. Account should be taken, however, of the fact that the complainant was employed uninterruptedly by the Organization for more than three years. He was officially notified of the non-renewal of his contract - which until then had been regularly renewed - only by a letter he received on 28 January 2004, that is three days prior to the expiry of his last appointment. The defendant Organization suggests that he was well aware that his contract would not be renewed since he had been informed of that fact first unofficially and then officially on 16 January 2004. It even goes so far as to argue that the announcement of the competition for the complainant's post in the vacancy notice of 27 October 2003 constituted the 'reasonable notice' required by the case law and that, from that date onwards, the complainant knew full well that if he was not selected he would not continue working for the [Organization].
The Tribunal considers that it was only through the non-renewal decision received on 28 January 2004 that the complainant was able to know for certain that he would be leaving the Organization and that he would not be offered any other employment, despite the fact that [...] he had performed many duties, starting in 1998. Thus the situation is not very different from that dealt with by the Tribunal in its Judgment 2104 [...] and it is worth noting that, in its attempt to reach a settlement, the Organization had offered to pay the complainant the equivalent of three months' salary, consisting of two months in lieu of reasonable notice and one month for moral injury. That proposal was reasonable and, in view of the long working relationship between the [Organization] and the complainant and the very brief time that elapsed between the notification of the non-renewal of the contract and the end of the complainant's appointment, the Tribunal will echo that proposal by ruling that the complainant shall be paid a sum equal to three months' salary and allowances."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2104
Keywords:
case law; competition; contract; decision; duty to inform; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; right of appeal; seniority; separation from service; short-term; staff regulations and rules; vacancy notice;
Judgment 2461
99th Session, 2005
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 1-3
Extract:
ESO considers that the complainant's internal appeal is not receivable according to Article R VI 1.02 of the Staff Regulations since he is no longer a staff member.
"The organisation is correct. The Staff Regulations do not give him any right of internal appeal. [...] The complainant alleges a contradiction between ESO's Staff Rules and Regulations [...] and Article VII(1) and (2) of the Tribunal's Statute. In fact, the language of the Tribunal's Statute does not specifically require the organisation to provide specific internal remedies, it only requires that those actually existing be exhausted."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article VII(1) and (2) of the Statute
Organization rules reference: Article R VI 1.02 of ESO's Staff Regulations
Keywords:
iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; official; organisation; organisation's duties; provision; receivability of the complaint; right; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
Judgment 2294
96th Session, 2004
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
Case of an official who served the Organization for 16 years and always gave satisfaction, whose post was abolished. The Organization states "that although the complainant was entitled to apply for posts which fell vacant after his appointment had been terminated, he did not do so. [T]he Tribunal considers that it was up to [the Organization] to make proposals to the complainant and to give some preference to his application."
Keywords:
abolition of post; appointment; candidate; official; organisation's duties; post; post held by the complainant; priority; reassignment; right; seniority; separation from service; vacancy;
Judgment 2261
95th Session, 2003
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15-16
Extract:
The complainant challenges a disciplinary measure of dismissal for misconduct based on the following three charges: (1) external commercial activities and misrepresentation, (2) disloyalty, and (3) insubordination. In the challenged decision, the Director-General refused to follow the Appeals Committee's recommendation to the effect that the three charges be dismissed and confirmed the dismissal, dealing in detail with the first charge. Although the Tribunal acknowledges that the evidence justifies the Director-General's position, it sets aside the impugned decision because "the Director-General entirely failed to give any reason whatsoever for disagreeing with the Committee's recommendations respecting the second and third charges". The Tribunal adds that "it is not for [...] itself [to] examine the evidence to find justification for the unmotivated decision of the Director-General. [...] Nor should it condone the organization's failure to bring the internal appeal process to a timely and proper conclusion effectively depriving the complainant of both his remedy and his employment for over three years. Accordingly, it will quash the penalty on the first charge only and refer the matter back to the Director-General for a new decision on the penalty after giving the complainant full opportunity to make representations."
Keywords:
concurrent employment; conduct; decision; disciplinary measure; due process; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; fitness for international civil service; insubordination; internal appeal; internal appeals body; misconduct; organisation's duties; refusal; report; right of appeal; right to reply; separation from service; termination of employment; time limit;
Judgment 2259
95th Session, 2003
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
Compliance with the rules of procedure is among the guarantees offered to international civil servants. There is nothing to suggest that the omission of a formality has no adverse effects on the situation of the staff members concerned. In the present case, a written proposal by the Director of the Administration Division would have been particularly necessary for consideration of the complainant's case. His plea based on the breach of Administrative Directive No. 20 (Rev.2) therefore succeeds.
Keywords:
contract; due process; effect; non-renewal of contract; omission; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; safeguard; separation from service;
Judgment 2162
93rd Session, 2002
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Where a notice period ends after the expiry of a fixed-term contract, the notice requirement will be met if the contract is extended by the amount of time needed to make up the full period of notice."
Keywords:
contract; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; separation from service;
Judgment 2152
93rd Session, 2002
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 11 and 14
Extract:
"The requirement of good faith dealings is a two-way street. While staff members are under no obligation to assist the administration in any actions the latter may wish to take against them, they do have a duty not to so conduct themselves as to deliberately frustrate normal dealings with their employer. The latter is entitled to assume that the employees will receive and accept written communications sent to them in the normal course of affairs. [...] The fact that the complainant, by his own conduct, only took possession of the letter and became aware of his dismissal [the day after the expiry of his probation] cannot prevent the [Organisation] from having given him valid notice of dismissal."
Keywords:
date of notification; good faith; notice; probationary period; separation from service; staff member's duties; termination of employment;
Judgment 2130
93rd Session, 2002
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
The relief sought by the complainant is that he be granted special leave with pay for the months of November 1999, December 1999 and January 2000. He "was informed that his appointment would be terminated as of 24 December 1999. He does not dispute that he was paid up to that date. Obviously, he cannot claim special leave with pay for any period during which he received his regular salary. Equally obviously, from 24 December 1999 to the end of January 2000, he was no longer on the staff and there can be no basis to his claim for special leave, with or without pay."
Keywords:
date; period; refusal; request by a party; salary; separation from service; special leave; status of complainant;
Judgment 2111
92nd Session, 2002
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The Tribunal acknowledges that the relationship between officials and international organisations does not come to an end when they cease to work (see in this respect Judgment 986). It must therefore be recognised that former officials who consider that the terms of their contracts of employment or Staff Regulations have been disregarded, or that the administration has not accorded them the protection and guarantees deriving from their position as international civil servants, may avail themselves of the means of recourse available for the recognition of their rights [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 986
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; locus standi; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; separation from service;
Judgment 2104
92nd Session, 2002
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
An international organization has a "duty to warn the [staff member] about the non-renewal [of his contract] long enough in advance to enable him to exercise his rights and take whatever steps he saw fit." The present case concerned a short-term appointment which was renewed several times.
Keywords:
contract; duration of appointment; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; separation from service; short-term;
Judgment 2103
92nd Session, 2002
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7 and 10
Extract:
"An organisation may try by all legal means to recover any money a staff member may owe it when he or she leaves service. But that does not entitle it to suspend or block consideration of the staff member's pension entitlements. [...] However, [the organization] was right to defer consideration of the complainant's entitlement to a repatriation allowance."
Keywords:
debt; organisation's duties; pension; pension entitlements; repatriation allowance; separation from service; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 2102
92nd Session, 2002
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"The duty laid on international organisations to treat their staff with due consideration and not to impair their dignity may extend beyond the term of their appointment. In charging a staff member with misconduct in the performance of duty an organisation must observe due process, otherwise it may be held liable even after its contractual or statutory ties with the official have ceased, and the Tribunal will entertain such matters."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; locus standi; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; respect for dignity; separation from service;
Judgment 2098
92nd Session, 2002
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant's appointment was terminated by mutual agreement. He appears to object that the organization terminated his employment while he was on sick leave. "Although the Tribunal held in Judgment 938 [...] that a staff member cannot be separated while on sick leave, it later pointed out that its ruling was to be seen in context and could not be applied in any circumstances whatever (see Judgment 1494 [...], under 6). The rule being intended to protect the staff member, it cannot be applied where the termination is the subject of an agreement, particularly when it has been mooted by the staff member concerned".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 938, 1494
Keywords:
agreed termination; case law; condition; contract; exception; iloat; limits; separation from service; sick leave;
Judgment 2089
92nd Session, 2002
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"To accept that pensions must always be adjusted to keep in line with post-retirement salary increases would be to expose pension funds to an uncertain and unmeasurable future liability which might well in the end wipe out the funds themselves."
Keywords:
acceptance; adjustment; discontinuance; increase; pension; pension adjustment system; retirement; salary; separation from service; special hazard; subsequent fact; unjspf;
Judgment 2080
92nd Session, 2002
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant's contract was not renewed upon expiry. "Interim Staff Rule 4.4.02(b) provides that separation as a result of the expiration of an appointment shall not be regarded as a termination [...] Rule 9.1.01(b) defines termination [...] as any separation initiated by the Director-General, other than the expiration of a contract. Therefore, the question of any termination indemnity payable to the complainant does not arise."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: OPCW INTERIM STAFF RULE 4.4.02(B), OPCW INTERIM STAFF RULE 9.1.01(B)
Keywords:
consequence; contract; decision; definition; difference; executive head; non-renewal of contract; official; provision; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements; termination of employment;
Judgment 2072
91st Session, 2001
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant benefited from a voluntary separation programme that the organization had had to implement because of financial difficulties. He is challenging the refusal to consider his request for re-employment. "The organization cannot be taken to task for not considering him for [vacant] posts for which he had not applied, or for not offering him another [post] while it was still in financial straits."
Keywords:
agreed termination; budgetary reasons; competition; failure to answer claim; participation; post; refusal; reinstatement; request by a party; separation from service; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 2054
91st Session, 2001
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"The Tribunal is unable to agree with the complainant that as a disabled former staff member he is entitled to a right to reassignment. There is no basis in the Staff Regulations for conferring on him a preferential status. As with any job applicant, he has to follow the procedures and apply for any desired vacant post. To rule otherwise would, in effect, introduce an amendment to the applicable rules to unduly favour disabled former staff members. As the Tribunal has held in Judgment 637 [...] the staff (much less former employees) 'may not demand amendment of the rules governing their employment'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 637
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; candidate; competition; handicapped person; priority; reassignment; right; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
Judgment 2049
91st Session, 2001
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
After lenghty negociations, the complainant accepted the offer of separation by mutual agreement (which increased by 50% his termination indemnity on the condition that he would not challenge the decision of separation either before the Appeals Board or the Tribunal). He pleads lack of consent. "The complainant cites financial difficulties and a 'reactive anxio-depressive clinical context' to demonstrate that he was in no state to consent freely. But the evidence shows that he had been examined by an expert chosen by mutual agreement between his doctor and the chief medical officer of [the organization] and that he had been found fit to resume work as from June 1996. There are no grounds for doubting that the complainant had all his mental faculties when, after lengthy negotiations, he finally accepted an offer which afforded him significant financial benefits. He has neither proved that his consent to the negotiated termination was deficient nor provided any evidence to cast doubt on its validity."
Keywords:
agreed termination; lack of consent; medical fitness; non-renewal of contract; offer; separation from service; terminal entitlements; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 1984
89th Session, 2000
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant was dismissed for serious misconduct. He argues that the German criminal law would have taken into account mitigating circumstances, something the organisation failed to do. "Although under German criminal law these facts might remove or mitigate the penal nature that could attach to the offence of attempted fraud, when disciplinary sanctions are applied it is immaterial whether or not an act is criminal. Furthermore, the fact that the organisation in the end suffered no financial injury because it did not have to pay out money it did not owe, does not mean that the complainant's misconduct should not have been sanctioned."
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; domestic law; lack of injury; misconduct; mitigating circumstances; separation from service; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
|
