Medical opinion (417,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Medical opinion
Total judgments found: 43
< previous | 1, 2, 3 | next >
Judgment 2996
110th Session, 2011
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15-16
Extract:
"While generally speaking there is no reason why an advisory body on medical questions should not comprise the same members when it has to give a series of opinions on developments in the condition of the same official, that is not the case where it is required to give a second opinion on the same request of that person, as occurred here. [...] As the Tribunal found in [...] Judgments 179 and 2671, the rule that members of an advisory body must not examine a case on which they have previously expressed a view applies even in the absence of an express text, since its purpose is to protect officials against arbitrary action."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 179, 2671
Keywords:
advisory body; bias; composition of the internal appeals body; exception; medical board; medical opinion; no provision; official; organisation's duties; purpose; request by a party; safeguard;
Judgment 2976
110th Session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
Grant of an exceptional long-term care benefit for an insured person suffering from complete paralysis below the arms.
"[T]he question whether something should be granted as an 'exceptional' measure is one that invites a value judgement akin to that involved in a discretionary decision. As such, it is subject to only limited review. However, it may be reviewed on the grounds, amongst others, that it involves an error of law and/or that it overlooks some material fact (see, for example, Judgments 1281, under 2, and 2514, under 13)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1281, 2514
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; medical grounds; medical opinion;
Judgment 2947
109th Session, 2010
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal would draw attention to the fact that it is well settled that it may not replace the findings of medical boards with its own. It does, however, have full competence to say whether there was due process and to examine whether the Committee’s opinion shows any material mistake or inconsistency, or overlooks some essential facts, or plainly misread the evidence (see, for example, Judgments 1284, under 4, 2361, under 9, or 2714, under 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1284, 2361, 2714
Keywords:
medical opinion;
Judgment 2537
101st Session, 2006
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
One of the two members of the Medical Committee convened to examine the complainant's work capacity attached a handwritten statement to the report that an occupational origin of the invalidity could not be excluded. The Tribunal rules that "it was certainly not appropriate for members of the Office's Administration - faced with a clearly contradictory medical report - to approach the second expert in order to persuade him to withdraw his diverging opinion."
Keywords:
discontinuance; independence; invalidity; medical board; medical opinion; service-incurred;
Judgment 2524
100th Session, 2006
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 32
Extract:
"Although the complainant provided the report of [her doctor] to the Joint Appeals Panel, that did not amount to implied authorisation for it to be given to [her two successive supervisors] for their comments (see Judgment 2271, under 7). There were other means available to the Administration to obtain answers from [the supervisors] to the claims made by the complainant. The disclosure to them of the medical report was a serious breach of confidence and one that, in the circumstances, was particularly insensitive."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2271
Keywords:
confidential evidence; internal appeals body; medical opinion; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's interest; supervisor;
Judgment 2361
97th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal, in keeping with consistent precedent, may not replace the findings of medical boards with its own. But it does have full competence to say whether there was due process and whether the reports used as a basis for administrative decisions show any material mistake or inconsistency, or overlook some essential fact, or plainly misread the evidence (see Judgment 1284, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1284
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; decision; disregard of essential fact; iloat; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedure before the tribunal; report; vested competence;
Judgment 2083
92nd Session, 2002
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 8-9
Extract:
The complainant suffered from retinal detachments and a detachment of the vitreous. The organization recognised her eye condition as service incurred. In "September 1998 [...] the [organization] decide[d] to stop reimbursing the bills [she submitted] on [the] grounds [...] that curing her retinal detachments was no longer the object of the treatment. However, it did not show that the service-incurred injuries were not a "direct and principal" cause of the treatment [... ] The Tribunal takes the view that although, as the organization says, the decision to stop reimbursing the bills was at the discretion of the Director-General, it could not be taken without an independent expert medical opinion obtained through a process which provides all the safeguards of transparency and impartiality." The case is therefore sent back to the organization.
Keywords:
consequence; decision; discretion; due process; executive head; expert inquiry; grounds; illness; independence; lack of evidence; medical expenses; medical opinion; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; professional accident; refund; refusal; safeguard; service-incurred;
Judgment 2047
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The complainant adopts the position taken by the Appeals Committee to the effect that the [organisation] was obligated to appoint its own medical officer for the purposes of dealing with her claim and was not entitled to rely on the medical adviser appointed by [the insurance company] Van Breda for that purpose. For the Tribunal to so hold would amount to a denial of the organisation's right to appoint the medical officer of its choice. The fact that it selects and relies on the same medical adviser as the one appointed by the insurer, whom it has engaged to carry out its obligations to provide health coverage to its staff, is not in the least surprising. Such appointment cannot have any adverse effect upon the complainant who retains the right given by Article 90 [of the Service Regulations] to have any contested issue relating to medical matters determined by the Invalidity Committee."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 90 OF THE SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
insurance; invalidity; medical board; medical consultant; medical opinion; organisation's duties;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"With regard to the complainant's claim to be provided with copies of any medical reports relied upon by [the insurance brokers] Van Breda, it is trite law that a staff member's right to see medical reports may not ordinarily be challenged. As such, the complainant should be provided with copies of medical reports contained in Van Breda's file relating to this matter. Whether or not the [organisation] has these documents in their possession is irrelevant. As the policy holder, it has the right to give instructions that the complainant be given access to these documents and must ensure that she is provided with the information as soon as reasonably possible. [...] It is of no avail that some or all of the reports in question may have been given by the complainant's own doctors: she is entitled to know from Van Breda exactly what medical information about her it has received and from whom."
Keywords:
duty to inform; insurance; medical opinion; medical records; organisation's duties; right;
Judgment 1752
85th Session, 1998
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"[The Tribunal] may not replace qualified medical opinion with its own, though it may review the procedure and say whether the doctors' findings show any factual mistake or inconsistency, or overlook an essential fact, or draw a plainly wrong conclusion from the evidence."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; disregard of essential fact; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1640
83rd Session, 1997
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
"The medical opinions of independent medical practitioners would ordinarily prevail and the Tribunal would not interfere. But this is no ordinary case. [...] The Tribunal had to appoint a medical expert to give a final opinion on the complainant's medical condition [...]. That expert found that she was not fit to return to work", a finding that was at odds with the medical opinions that the Agency has relied on to justify its decision.
Keywords:
different appraisals; exception; illness; judicial review; limits; medical examination; medical fitness; medical opinion; sick leave;
Judgment 1516
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"The complainant wants the Tribunal to 'declare that UNESCO has failed to act and itself make the final determination [regarding the degree of her invalidity] that the organization has for years been refusing' her. Having put up with years of dilatoriness and prevarication,she is understandably anxious to have her entitlements speedily determined. Being unable, however, to rule on the medical aspects of her case, the Tribunal has no choice but to send the case back to the organization for completion of the process of review in keeping with the rules."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; expert inquiry; iloat statute; invalidity; judicial review; medical board; medical examination; medical opinion; rate;
Judgment 1284
75th Session, 1993
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Precedent has it [...] that the Tribunal may not replace the Board's assessment of medical questions with its own. But it goes further than that: the Tribunal does have full competence to say whether there was due process and whether the medical findings show any material mistake or inconsistency, or overlook some essential fact, or plainly misread the evidence."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; report;
Judgment 1248
74th Session, 1993
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant "applies to the Tribunal for appointment of an expert to inquire into the scientific issues. His application is disallowed because the evidence he submits casts no doubt on the soundness of the medical opinion the organisation is relying on. For the same reason the Tribunal rejects his application for hearings."
Keywords:
advisory opinion; appraisal of evidence; expert inquiry; further submissions; medical opinion; oral proceedings; refusal; tribunal;
Judgment 1180
73rd Session, 1992
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The complainant argues that the Agency ought to have consulted an independent doctor. But there was no requirement in the Rules that it refer the complainant's case to outside doctors; indeed the Director General was right to rely on Eurocontrol's own medical officer, who was authorised to assess the position both by his own lights and in view of the opinion expressed by the complainant's own doctor. The complainant has not adduced any evidence to suggest that the Agency's medical officer made an improper assessment either of the state of the complainant's health or of the nature of the treatment he received [...] There is therefore no reason for the Tribunal to seek further expert advice".
Keywords:
expert inquiry; illness; medical consultant; medical opinion;
Judgment 992
68th Session, 1990
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant's application for permission to take a cure prescribed by his doctor was rejected. The Agency's medical officer reported to the health fund that the doctor had given no clear evidence of the need for the prescribed treatment. In keeping with Article 20 of Rule No. 10 concerning sickness and accident insurance, expenses relating to a cure shall be refunded provided that the cure "is recognised as strictly necessary by the medical officer". The Tribunal sees nothing improper in the medical officer's assessment nor in the administration's ensuing denial of permission.
Keywords:
cure; health insurance; medical consultant; medical expenses; medical opinion; refund; refusal;
Judgment 932
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10(C)
Extract:
"If in the original medical examination by the Committee, the doctors and the complainant had failed to understand each other, that would afford grounds for impugning the opinion. [...] The burden of proof is on the complainant to satisfy the Tribunal that the findings of the medical examination (which denied him sick-leave) [...] should be set aside because of language difficulties."
Keywords:
burden of proof; complainant; flaw; lack of evidence; medical board; medical opinion; refusal; sick leave;
Judgment 652
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
When the case was referred to the medical adviser, all she did was to telephone [the complainant's] doctor. In the course of their conversation [the doctor] consented to change the earlier certificate and declare that [by a specified date] the complainant was again fit for work. [...] Such confabulation between professional colleagues is not in itself objectionable. It would no doubt have been more satisfactory if the two doctors had first carried out a clinical examination. [...] Their approach undoubtedly made it harder to establish the facts, and for that the complainant - whom they could have asked to undergo an examination - is not to blame. The burden of proof is therefore on the [organisation]."
Keywords:
burden of proof; medical certificate; medical consultant; medical examination; medical fitness; medical opinion; organisation; refusal; sick leave;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The mere production of a certificate from a doctor of the official's own choosing does not confer entitlement to sick leave. The organisation may always challenge the certificate on the strength of the opinion of a practitioner it has itself designated".
Keywords:
medical certificate; medical consultant; medical opinion; organisation; right; sick leave;
Judgment 620
53rd Session, 1984
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Tribunal may not substitute its own views for those of the experts. It will not entertain the complainant's plea that their findings were superficial, illogical or at variance with up-to-date medical opinion. The material issue is whether correct procedure was observed in consulting them.
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; expert inquiry; judicial review; medical examination; medical opinion;
Judgment 541
49th Session, 1982
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant was classified "unfit for employment". Her appointment was terminated. The Tribunal found that in failing to accord the medical opinion of the complainant's personal physician the serious and thorough consideration it deserved, the organization's chief medical officer took insufficient account of an essential fact. The decision suffers from a defect which the Tribunal will take into consideration.
Keywords:
disregard of essential fact; health reasons; medical consultant; medical fitness; medical opinion; termination of employment; termination of employment for health reasons;
Judgment 487
48th Session, 1982
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The organization's medical officer [...] who examined the complainant [...] delayed [...] reporting in writing to the personnel office and it is true that the administrative process is open to criticism on that account, even supposing that because of doubts over the case he decided [...] to telephone [...] the complainant's own doctor [...]. But the administrative delay does not in itself constitute a flaw which warrants quashing the decision."
Keywords:
administrative delay; flaw; lack of injury; medical consultant; medical opinion;
< previous | 1, 2, 3 | next >
|
