Judgment 1342
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
Having been born on 24 October 1934, [the complainant] is now only a few months short of the normal age of retirement, which is sixty; moreover, he is already being paid a retirement pension. So it is too late to order reinstatement or compliance with the reduction-in-force procedure.
Keywords:
reinstatement; retirement;
Judgment 1311
76th Session, 1994
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 21
Extract:
The complainant, who reached retirement age, is challenging the amount he received in terminal entitlements. Two former officials, also retirees, have filed applications to intervene. "It appears from the wording of the applications that the interveners' cases were settled once and for all when they left the ESO. Their entitlements are therefore beyond challenge and this judgment may neither reduce nor increase them. The applications fail."
Keywords:
intervention; reckoning; request by a party; retirement; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 1211
74th Session, 1993
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
The material question is whether a staff member who is entitled to payment of a pension at the maximum rate must go on contributing to the scheme. "The organisation is right in holding that there is no exception to the rule about monthly deduction."
Keywords:
contributions; pension; retirement; seniority; staff member's duties;
Judgment 1143
72nd Session, 1992
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
The complainant applied for extension of the age limit on the grounds that without it her pension would be paltry and that her continued service would be in the organization's interest. The Director General rejected her request, relying on Judgment 358 [...], which he said precluded his acting in the exclusive interests of the staff member, and on the fact that Staff Regulation 9.8 prevented him from making an exception to the age-limit rule to take account of an official's financial situation. The Tribunal holds that "in stating his decision in those terms the Director General mistook the scope of his discretion and the ratio of Judgment 358: he may not refuse to exercise his discretion just because he is being asked to take a staff member's financial situation into account." Moreover, her performance reports were good. "The Director General erred in law because his decision was not in accordance with Regulation 9.8(a). He could have taken into account the complainant's financial situation provided that that was not the exclusive factor and that the interests of the Organization were also taken into account."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WIPO STAFF REGULATION 9.8
ILOAT Judgment(s): 358
Keywords:
age limit; exception; organisation's interest; pension; retirement;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Regulation 9.8 confers on the Director General discretion to extend the age limit in individual cases if he considers that to be in the organization's interests. The determination of what the organization's interests are being peculiarly within the Director General's discretion, the Tribunal has a limited power of review and will interfere with his decision only if it was taken without authority or [...]."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WIPO STAFF REGULATION 9.8
Keywords:
age limit; discretion; exception; extension beyond retirement age; judicial review; organisation's interest; retirement;
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;
Judgment 1053
69th Session, 1990
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7, Summary
Extract:
When the complainants retired in 1988 they chose to take partial lump-sum payment of their pensions in the belief that United States taxes levied on those amounts would be reimbursed in keeping with a practice that remained in force until 1989. But they were denied reimbursement. As the complainants all believed the practice to be applicable when they made their choice, both the principle of non-retroactivity and that of good faith apply.
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; date; good faith; lump-sum; non-retroactivity; pension; pension entitlements; practice; refund; retirement; tax;
Judgment 1004
68th Session, 1990
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
In accordance with Circular No. 380 (Series 6) of 3 March 1987, the complainant, who had taken early retirement, was reappointed under a short-term contract. The decision he impugns is one denying him the right to enter internal competitions on the grounds that he had not yet acquired two years' continuous service since his reappointment. The Tribunal holds that the decision was in keeping with Article 4.11 of the Staff Regulations which says that "a former official, on reappointment, shall be regarded for the purpose of these Regulations, as becoming an official for the first time". The complaint is dismissed.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 4.11 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS; CIRCULAR 380 (SERIES 6) OF 3 MARCH 1987
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; condition; consequence; early retirement; internal competition; refusal; retirement;
Judgment 960
66th Session, 1989
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The organisation argues that the complainant's internal appeal against the application of the amended scale of pensionable remuneration was time-barred. The plea fails. The Tribunal holds that "although [the complainant] must have known for over two years that amending the scale would have consequences when she left she could not know what the financial consequences would be."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; amount; consequence; decision; internal appeal; pension; pensionable remuneration; receivability of the complaint; reduction of salary; retirement; scale; separation from service; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 949
65th Session, 1988
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant retired in December 1985. He is seeking inter alia recognition of his actual duties from the date of appointment in August 1970, reinstatement at grade P.2 as from 31 August 1970, and revision of his retirement pension. "The complaint is clearly irreceivable both because the complainant is not impugning any decision and because any time limit for appealing against the injury he alleges expired many years ago."
Keywords:
cause of action; complaint; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint; retirement; summary procedure; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 832
62nd Session, 1987
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"International civil servants quite understandably put stock in their retirement benefits and quite rightly want an income that, even if it will not sustain the same standard of living, will at least be comfortable. The decisions impugned do mar the outlook, in some cases seriously. But that is not enough to establish breach of an acquired right."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; amount; breach; grounds; lack of evidence; official; retirement; separation from service; social benefits;
Judgment 653
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The organisation introduced incentives for certain officials willing to accept early retirement at age 60. The Tribunal notes that it was the complainant's own choice not to leave at 60 and that he later requested early retirement at the age of 62 1/2. The Tribunal concludes that it was national law which induced him not to retire at 60. The organisation cannot be held liable on that account. The complainant is not entitled to special benefits.
Keywords:
early retirement; retirement;
Judgment 632
54th Session, 1984
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The applicable provision requires compensatory leave to be taken within two months of the date of accrual. "Indeed it is difficult to see how leave can be compensatory if it is taken at a time far remote from the period when the overtime was performed. [...] The complainant has retired from the [organization] and it is not now possible to grant compensatory leave to him. [...] The only solution is for the WHO to pay the complainant the difference in overtime rates".
Keywords:
compensatory leave; overtime; payment; retirement; separation from service; time limit;
Judgment 509
48th Session, 1982
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The organisation argues that the Tribunal may only hear complaints filed by serving officials. "The argument fails. When someone leaves the staff he is entitled, then as indeed throughout his career, to compliance with the staff regulations. A tribunal is competent in regard to every aspect of the official's service, and the grant of a certificate is a necessary incident of his employment."
Keywords:
certificate of service; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; retirement; right of appeal; separation from service;
Judgment 470
47th Session, 1982
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant seeks reinstatement for two years. PAHO Staff Rule 1050.2 requires the Director "to take steps to try to keep on the staff someone whose post has been abolished. Such steps are not called for in this case. By his own account the complainant would have received a retirement pension a year and a half after leaving the organization. [...] There are therefore no grounds for now ordering his reinstatement."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1050.2 OF THE PAHO STAFF RULES
Keywords:
abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment; retirement;
Judgment 402
43rd Session, 1980
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
As to loss of earning capacity on account of long-term invalidity, "there is no general principle by which compensation is restricted to the period of the employee's contract with the employer who is liable. It is quite usual for persons of pensionable age to seek further employment and there is no reason why a loss of earning capacity should not apply to that."
Keywords:
compensation; duration of appointment; incapacity; invalidity; material damages; period; professional accident; retirement; service-incurred;
Judgment 358
41st Session, 1978
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"A decision by the Director [...] to extend a staff member's appointment beyond the age limit set in the Staff Regulations is purely discretionary" and the Tribunal may interfere with such a decision only in exceptional circumstances set out in the case law.
Keywords:
age limit; contract; discretion; extension beyond retirement age; judicial review; retirement;
Considerations
Extract:
"Although the Director is empowered to extend a staff member's appointment to the age of 65, he is in no case bound to do so. He may exercise that authority to allow an exception only in the interests of the [organisation], not in the exclusive interests of the staff member. In deciding on the complainant's case he would have to bear in mind the possibility that the complainant might obtain a pension, but that was only one fact to be taken into account among others."
Keywords:
age limit; contract; contributory service; discretion; extension beyond retirement age; organisation's interest; pension; retirement; staff member's interest;
Judgment 267
36th Session, 1976
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The complainant had reached retirement age and his employment was not extended by the Director-General. "[I]t does not appear from the dossier that on his return to headquarters the complainant was promised any further appointment." Nor did the material letter "imply any such promise, particularly since it was not addressed to the complainant."
Keywords:
age limit; consequence; contract; evidence; headquarters; lack of evidence; offer; promise; retirement; transfer;
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant maintains that the circumstances of his dismissal damaged his reputation. "There is nothing dishonourable about having to retire at the normal age stipulated in the Staff Regulations. Moreover [...] the organization gave him a written testimonial thanking him for his services over the past twenty-two years, and that served to remove - assuming it were necessary - the prejudice he has alleged."
Keywords:
age limit; contract; enforcement; extension beyond retirement age; fixed-term; lack of injury; non-renewal of contract; refusal; retirement; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 1
Extract:
Under the applicable provisions, headquarters officials must retire at the age of 62 "unless the Director-General [decides] otherwise for exceptional reasons in the interests of the organization." In the present case, "the Director-General abided by the general rule and was indeed in no way required to grant an exemption."
Keywords:
age limit; contract; discretion; extension beyond retirement age; headquarters official; organisation's interest; retirement;
Summary
Extract:
The age limit for headquarters officials is 62, unless otherwise decided by the Director-General for exceptional reasons; for field officials there is a possibility of remaining in service until 65, but not as a matter of course [not applicable to holders of fixed-term appointments]. The complainant had been appointed project director; he was subsequently recalled to headquarters and informed that his contract would terminate. The Tribunal dismisses his claim for the quashing of the decision to retire him.
Keywords:
age limit; contract; difference; discretion; exception; executive head; extension beyond retirement age; field; headquarters official; retirement;
Judgment 255
34th Session, 1975
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The applicable provision stipulates that the evaluation given in appraisal reports shall serve as the basis for assistance extended to a staff member to improve his services and for decisions concerning that staff member's status and maintenance in the organization. It is open to question whether this provision, having regard to these objects, applies at all in the case of a staff member who has retired. If it does, there could be no relief for a breach of it except by the payment of compensation. In the present case, the complainant could not suffer injury from a statement assessing his work during the final 11 months of his service.
Keywords:
complainant; enforcement; lack of injury; performance report; purpose; retirement; separation from service; work appraisal;
Judgment 223
31st Session, 1973
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
It appears from the evidence that the "sole purpose [of the decision not to renew the complainant's contract upon his reaching retirement age] was to remove [him]." Certain irregularities could be observed in his service, but no serious inquiry was made nor any disciplinary proceedings undertaken. "[T]he decision [...] was based on mere suspicions unsupported by the slightest evidence, and is therefore tainted by misuse of authority and must be quashed."
Keywords:
abuse of power; age limit; contract; disciplinary procedure; fixed-term; inquiry; investigation; lack of evidence; misconduct; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; retirement;
Considerations
Extract:
The retirement age is fixed at sixty. "[I]n exceptional cases the Director may retain an official in service until the age of sixty-five. The text [...] allows the Director full discretion in determining the special cases in which an official may be retained in service beyond the normal age limit. The Director thus enjoys discretionary power in this respect".
Keywords:
age limit; contract; discretion; exception; extension beyond retirement age; judicial review; retirement;
Considerations
Extract:
The non-renewal decision having to be quashed for misuse of authority, account must be taken of material and moral damage and of the fact that the complainant could not have been retained in service beyond the age of 65. "It would therefore be a fair assessment of the circumstances as a whole to award [...] compensation in an amount of 35,000 Swiss francs, less the sum already granted to him by [the organisation]."
Keywords:
abuse of power; age limit; amount; contract; criteria; fixed-term; material damages; misuse of authority; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; retirement;
Judgment 204
30th Session, 1973
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
Under the applicable provision, the pensionable age for officials is 62. The Director-General's decision was taken in pursuance of the above-mentioned provision. Although the provision empowers the Director-General to retain the services of an official beyond the age-limit, this derogation is confined to exceptional cases and lies within the discretion of the head of the organisation. In the present case, the Director-General's appraisal of the facts shows none of the flaws which the Tribunal may correct.
Keywords:
age limit; contract; discretion; exception; extension beyond retirement age; judicial review; provision; retirement; staff regulations and rules;
