Judicial review (538, 540, 542, 544, 547, 548, 549, 550, 551, 553, 555, 557, 558, 862, 559, 561, 563, 565, 569, 571, 572, 927, 841,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Judicial review
Total judgments found: 548
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 | next >
Judgment 1262
75th Session, 1993
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The case law has made it consistently plain that a decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment, being discretionary, may be set aside only if it was taken without authority, or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the facts, or if there was abuse of authority. Moreover, when the reason given for non-renewal is unsatisfactory performance, the Tribunal will not replace the organisation's assessment of the complainant's fitness for his duties with its own."
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; contract; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; fixed-term; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; procedural flaw; qualifications; unsatisfactory service;
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
"The complainant argues that the ESO drew mistaken conclusions from the facts in that it was not free to have him perform tasks other than those provided for under the terms of his contract [...]. A description of the complainant's post [...] that he himself signed included what were called 'background activities', and they went beyond the tasks that had originally been required of him. The Tribunal is satisfied that by confining himself to [certain tasks] he displayed a lack of commitment which properly put at issue the question as to whether the observatory should extend his contract." The ESO did not draw plainly mistaken conclusions about his performance.
Keywords:
contract; decision; discretion; fixed-term; judicial review; mistaken conclusion; non-renewal of contract; post description; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
Judgment 1251
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant was accused of misappropriating funds and summarily dismissed for misconduct. The Tribunal holds that though the Appeals Board "recorded in its report the organization's submissions on the facts, it did not come to any conclusion on them and indeed said it was 'extremely difficult to impute the misfeasances committed to the complainant'. The Director-General's decision is thus flawed with the wrong assumption that the Board had made findings adverse to the complainant."
Keywords:
decision; disciplinary measure; flaw; internal appeals body; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; serious misconduct; summary dismissal; termination of employment;
Judgment 1250
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant was dismissed for misconduct after refusing a transfer outside headquarters. He pleads that the FAO overlooked an essential fact by deciding to transfer him without taking account of his family situation. But he was allowed twelve months "to sort out the matter of his wife's career or obtain a suitable post at headquarters. He argues that he had more than 'ordinary family needs'. But there is nothing out of the ordinary about a situation where spouses each have a job at one and the same duty station, and neither wishes to give it up. [...] Such circumstances do not confer immunity against transfer on an international official. [...] The postponement of transfer by fourteen months is evidence of adequate consideration of his 'family situation and intersts'."
Keywords:
decision; disregard of essential fact; duty station; headquarters; judicial review; official; refusal; serious misconduct; staff member's interest; termination of employment; transfer;
Judgment 1246
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has held on several occasions, for example in Judgment 1183, a decision by the Director-General not to confirm the appointment of a probationer 'is a discretionary one. Its power of review being limited, the Tribunal will set the decision aside only if it finds a mistake of fact or of law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or a clearly mistaken conclusion on the evidence, or neglect of an essential fact or abuse of authority.'"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1183
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; extension of contract; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; refusal;
Judgment 1245
74th Session, 1993
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 28-29
Extract:
"A duty does lie on the Agency to ensure that a staff member who qualifies should be made a participant in the [United Nations Joint Staff Pension] Fund, and the decision the Agency took [...] to exclude the complainant from participation in the Fund was based on several mistakes of fact and law [...]. Because the Agency committed those mistakes and failed in its duty to have the complainant readmitted in the fund [...] she is entitled to be put as far as possible in the position that she would be in now had she been readmitted to the Fund at the earliest available opportunity."
Keywords:
complainant; condition; judicial review; mistake of fact; organisation's duties; participation; unjspf;
Judgment 1235
74th Session, 1993
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Although the Director-General is not of course bound to appoint the candidate the Committee puts first and has discretion in making the choice, the reasons for his decision must be stated so that the Tribunal may properly exercise its power of review."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; judicial review; limits; organisation's duties; promotion board; purpose;
Judgment 1234
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
The complainant, an official at grade D.2, was moved twice in 18 months but given no explanation for the moves. His second transfer was to a post at a lower grade, some distance from headquarters and in a field he had never worked in. "Although the Director-General will ordinarily be treated as the best judge of what the organization's interests are and the Tribunal will not ordinarily interfere in his assessment of them, nevertheless it will do so in this case. It is quite inadequate to plead that the decision to transfer the complainant was 'in the interests of the organization'. The basis for reaching that conclusion must be made clear so that the Tribunal may exercise its power of review and determine whether there exists any of the grounds for setting aside a discretionary decision of that kind."
Keywords:
discretion; downgrading; duty to substantiate decision; grade; judicial review; limits; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; transfer;
Judgment 1231
74th Session, 1993
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 23
Extract:
The complainant seeks the quashing of a decision to dismiss him following the abolition of his post. The only grounds given for his dismissal are "just a broad allusion to the organization's 'service requirements' or 'interests'. Such terms are meaningless unless there is a fuller explanation enabling the staff member and, if need be, the Tribunal to grasp the actual reasons, especially where the outcome is as drastic as abolition of post and dismissal."
Keywords:
abolition of post; decision; duty to substantiate decision; judicial review; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; purport; staff member's interest; termination of employment;
Considerations 31 to 33
Extract:
A new post to which the complainant had been assigned was then abolished. The facts "lend weight to the complainant's view that 'shunting' him - as he puts it - into an empty administrative post was just a start to removing him. What bears out the foregoing is that apart from the broad allusion to 'interests' the impugned decisions disclose no consistent idea of reform warranting the creation of the post [in question] in 1989 or the abolition of it in 1991. There is no discerning in what happened anything but a series of makeshift measures taken - at heavy cost to the organization's coffers - to dispose of the case of an official Interpol wanted to discharge in disregard of due forms and process. To that extent there is a parallel in law with a case the Tribunal deplored in Judgment 807 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 807
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; case law; creation of post; judicial review; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; post held by the complainant; refusal to assign work;
Judgment 1230
74th Session, 1993
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The defendant maintains that the complainant did not meet the two-month time limit for lodging appeals and failed to exhaust the internal means of redress. The Committee was of the view that, in this case, exceptional circumstances warranted waiving the time limit and allowing the appeal. The defendant contends that the Committee's decision was not binding on the Agency. "Only where the Committee's appraisal of the circumstances is flagrantly wrong or based on plainly mistaken facts may the Director General disregard it, and even then his decision will be subject to review by the Tribunal."
Keywords:
condition; exception; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Agency granted the complainant only a short contract renewal, refusing to renew the contract until the date of his retirement. According to the defendant, this decision was based on information in its files which indicated that the complainant wasn't available after a certain date. Now it has been established that the complainant said he would be available as long as the Agency wished. "A decision by an international organization to grant only a short extension of appointment or none at all, though it is discretionary, must still be based on correct findings of fact."
Keywords:
contract; discretion; fixed-term; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; non-renewal of contract; organisation;
Judgment 1226
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3, 7 and 8
Extract:
The complainants challenge decisions by the Director-General confirming the abolition of free after-service medical cover. They allege breach of acquired rights and contend that the FAO's financial position did not warrant such measures. "The Tribunal will not compare the options open to the FAO in the area of financial policy since it might ignore the realities that the FAO has to take into account. All the Tribunal need do is acknowledge that it was because of the financial plight of the scheme and its own that the organization decided to do away with free coverage for pensioners. The change does cause the complainants detriment. [...] But that alone does not amount to breach of any acquired right. First, the effect of the change was to put all fao pensioners on a par. [...] Secondly, there were transitional measures to lighten the impact of the change [...]. Since the change was made by way of rules, and because of the reasons for it, the complainants have suffered no breach of any acquired right despite the injury to their interests."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; budgetary reasons; discretion; grounds; health insurance; insurance; judicial review; limits; medical expenses; organisation's interest; social benefits; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1223
74th Session, 1993
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
"True, a staff member may not assert any right to promotion and the choice of the successful applicant is at the discretion of the administration, which alone may appraise the organisation's interests. Yet the exercise of discretion is subject to restrictions in law and the Tribunal will to that extent review the decision: see for example Judgment 1016 [...]. So the staff member has undeniably the right to file an internal appeal or a complaint with the Tribunal if he believes that the appointment to a vacancy he has applied for is improper."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; cause of action; competition; complaint; discretion; internal candidate; judicial review; limits; organisation's interest; promotion; receivability of the complaint; refusal; right; vacancy notice;
Consideration 30
Extract:
The complainant, a Eurocontrol official, challenges the rejection of his application to a post of head of division and the appointment of an external candidate to that post. He alleges that the recruitment procedure was unlawful. "The Tribunal will not interfere in drafting a notice of vacancy or comparing candidates who respond to the notice. But for Eurocontrol to open a competition for serving officials and then change the terms of recruitment sub rosa so as to deny them any real chance of success was in breach of the duty of trust and fairness the organisation owes its staff."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; discretion; due process; equal treatment; good faith; judicial review; organisation's duties; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1221
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant seeks the quashing of an unfavourable assessment of her performance. "The assessment of her shows neither any mistake nor abuse of authority. [...] Since she has shown no significant mistake in [her generally negative] assessment and since the Tribunal exercises only a limited power of review over administrative decisions of that kind, her claims under this head must fail."
Keywords:
abuse of power; judicial review; mistake of fact; misuse of authority; performance report; rating; report;
Judgment 1217
74th Session, 1993
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant objects to CERN's refusal to change his home from that of which he is a citizen to another country. "The original determination of the home station on recruitment and any later change are incontrovertibly at the discretion of CERN, which has to give weight to the various criteria the Staff Regulations set. For the sake of sound management [...] the organization may set guidelines on the matter. So there can be no objection to its consistent policy of determining the staff member's home, barring evidence to the contrary, in his own country and allowing later change to some other country only where some change in circumstances so warrants."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; criteria; decision; discretion; home; home leave; judicial review; nationality; organisation's interest; place of origin; refusal;
Judgment 1204
74th Session, 1993
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complainants object to a decision denying them so-called "out-of-career" promotions. They submit that the original decisions were taken for an unlawful reason of principle and that the organization later confirmed the decisions on quite different grounds. The organization says it merely exercised the discretion inherent in managerial prerogative and did not alter the original reasons but merely added to them. "Although the competent authority has discretion to grant or refuse the promotion of staff who qualify under the material rules, it must abide by the rules, and whatever decisions it takes will be subject to judicial review [...] so as to determine whether they pass muster the rules have to be known to everyone and an organisation may not go beyond the duly published texts and resort to secret provisions that change the thrust of the ones it intended to treat as binding. Before it takes its discretionary decision, it must compare the merits of all staff who qualify under the rules [...] CERN committed two mistakes of law. One was to apply to the complainants rules that had never been published and that it regarded as binding. The other was to defend its position ex post facto by saying that its reasons for rejecting the complainants' claims were connected with their performance, though there is no evidence of any comparative and analytical assessment of the kind that international officials are entitled to."
Keywords:
applicable law; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; equal treatment; judicial review; organisation's duties; patere legem; promotion; publication; refusal;
Judgment 1200
73rd Session, 1992
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainants dispute the amendment of a provision concerning pensionable remuneration in the Staff Regulations of the International Training Centre of the ILO at Turin. They allege that the impugned decision is unlawful because it was in breach of the duty to consult the Staff Relations Committee under Articles 0.3 and 10.2(a) of the Staff Regulations. The Tribunal observes that the principle embodied in these provisions is plain: cooperation between staff and management. The sequence of events shows that the organisation did not follow the prescribed procedure. The Tribunal holds that when the Centre wishes to amend its Staff Regulations "it is making a decision of its own and must abide by the rules of its own making. [...] its failure [to do so] in this instance was unlawful and has the effect of avoiding the new text of [the provision]. [...] Since the individual decisions under challenge rest on an improperly made amendment to the Staff Regulations they are unlawful."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLES 0.3 AND 10.2 (A) OF THE ITC STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
advisory body; amendment to the rules; consultation; due process; flaw; general principle; judicial review; patere legem; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1199
73rd Session, 1992
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
A "point on which the Organisation is mistaken is that the Tribunal may and will entertain pleas of flaws in the decision-making process of the ILO which may entail examining the decision-making process in the United Nations."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; coordinated organisations; flaw; judicial review; organisation's duties; rule of another organisation;
Judgment 1197
73rd Session, 1992
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14, Summary
Extract:
Since the Organization has remained silent at all stages of the proceedings on various questions raised by the complainant, being "prevented from ruling on the issues before it the Tribunal adjourns review of the merits of the case pending further information and argument." It accordingly orders further submissions.
Keywords:
further submissions; interlocutory order; judicial review; reply; tribunal;
Judgment 1192
73rd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
One of the complainants "asks the Tribunal to 'admonish/censure the concerned staff officers of WHO' for a behaviour he describes and reproves. Such claims betray an utter misconception of the Tribunal's competence: suffice it to observe that the Tribunal will not declare what policies an organisation should adopt in future or hand out reprimands."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; judicial review; tribunal; vested competence;
Judgment 1185
73rd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to consistent precedent a decision to grant an appointment, even though it is a matter of discretion, may be set aside, and one flaw that will be fatal is that it was taken without authority."
Keywords:
case law; decision; decision-maker; discretion; judicial review;
Judgment 1184
73rd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1185, consideration 2.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1185
Keywords:
decision; decision-maker; discretion; judicial review;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 | next >
|
