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 1183
73rd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The purpose of probation is to find out whether a probationer has the mettle to make a satisfactory career in the organization. The competent authority will determine [...] whether or not to confirm the appointment and must be allowed the utmost measure of discretion in deciding whether someone [...] shows, not just the professional qualifications, but also the personal attributes for the particular post in which he is to be working. Only where the Tribunal finds the most serious or glaring flaw in the exercise of the Director-General's discretion will it interfere."
Keywords:
career; discretion; flaw; judicial review; post; probationary period; purpose; qualifications;
Judgment 1177
73rd Session, 1992
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"When the Director-General's decision is not based on the results of an examination marked by an independent body, he has a wide degree of discretion in making an appointment and granting promotion. Though he is not bound by any recommendation from an advisory body, his authority does not make referral to such a body pointless. A selection body relieves him of the burden of carrying out an assessment himself. It ensures that all applications for appointment or promotion, whatever their source, shall be examined impartially and on the merits. And its report enables the Tribunal to appraise the background to the impugned decision and determine whether it shows any flaw."
Keywords:
advisory body; appointment; competition; discretion; further submissions; impartiality; interlocutory order; judicial review; promotion; promotion board; recommendation; report;
Consideration 5
Extract:
The defendant organisation has refused to produce certain documents pleading privilege. "An item that forms part of the decision may not be withheld from the Tribunal's scrutiny. [...] There shall therefore be further submissions to complete the case records, the Union being required to supply the [material documents]."
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; further submissions; interlocutory order; judicial review; refusal;
Judgment 1175
73rd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, judgments 736 [...] and 1161 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion for the President. Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of dismissal of a probationer, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 736, 1161
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; contract; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; termination of employment;
Judgment 1161
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, Judgments 687 [...] and 736 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion for the [executive head] and the Tribunal will not substitute its own judgment for the organisation's in matters that require such exercise of discretion. Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of dismissal of a probationer, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 687, 736
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; termination of employment;
Judgment 1153
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, Judgments 687 [...] and 736 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion [...] and the Tribunal will not substitute its own judgment for the organisation's in matters that require such exercise of discretion. [...] Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of the dismissal, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 687, 736
Keywords:
case law; discretion; judicial review; probationary period; termination of employment;
Judgment 1152
72nd Session, 1992
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"As [the Tribunal] has said many times, grading requires close familiarity with the conditions in which the staff member works. [...] The decision is, in other words, a discretionary one. [...] Consistent precedent has it that the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment or direct that a new one be made unless it is satisfied on the evidence that there is a fatal flaw".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; limits; post; post classification;
Judgment 1151
72nd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"According to consistent precedent, a decision to appoint or promote a staff member, 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:
appointment; case law; competence; decision; decision-maker; discretion; judicial review; promotion;
Judgment 1144
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"As was said in Judgment 806 [...], a decision on a staff report, being a discretionary one, may be set aside only on limited grounds such as a procedural or formal flaw, a mistake of fact or of law, the overlooking of some material fact, abuse of authority or the drawing of a mistaken conclusion from the evidence. That judgment goes on to explain that the review will be more limited because at the EPO there is a procedure for conciliation on staff reports and the Service Regulations allow the staff member to appeal to a joint committee made up of people who are closely familiar with the running of the Office."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 806
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; performance report; rebuttal;
Judgment 1143
72nd Session, 1992
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
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 1138
72nd Session, 1992
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
"By virtue of UNESCO Staff Rule 104.6(b) a fixed-term contract may at the Director-General's discretion be extended or converted into an indefinite appointment, but the staff member has neither any right to an extension nor any legitimate expectancy of one. In keeping with precedent [...] the Tribunal will not interfere with the discretionary decision not to extend an appointment unless it was made without authority or in breach of a rule of procedure, or was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or overlooked some essential fact, or amounted to an abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 104.6
Keywords:
contract; discretion; extension of contract; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; titularization;
Judgment 1137
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Only on the limited grounds often stated in the case law will the Tribunal interfere with discretionary decisions such as one to promote an official. [...] So the Tribunal will, for example, [not] review the records of the candidates a promotion board was considering".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; promotion;
Judgment 1136
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant is objecting to an appraisal report. "According to well-established precedent [...] a reporting officer has wide discretion [...] and [his assessment] will stand unless there is an obvious mistake of fact or failure to show the sort of objectivity that ought to govern reporting."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; performance report; work appraisal;
Judgment 1131
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not review a policy set by the General Conference, but it does review individual decisions taken to give effect to such policy".
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; decision; general decision; individual decision; judicial review; legislative body;
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Tribunal's "power of review is limited. It may not supplant an organisation's view with its own on such matters as a restructuring of posts or redeployment of staff intended to make savings or improve efficiency. Nor may it consider whether abolishing a post was the right thing to do. But it will interfere with any decision that was taken without authority [etc]".
Keywords:
abolition of post; budgetary reasons; competence of tribunal; discretion; judicial review; reorganisation;
Consideration 2
Extract:
In keeping with a resolution adopted by the General Conference in response to budgetary constraints UNESCO had to make staff cuts. "According to the definition of its competence in its Statute, the Tribunal will not review the policy followed by the Director-General in furtherance of the Conference's decision. It will, however, consider whether there was any flaw in the Director-General's exercise of his authority in an individual case."
Keywords:
abolition of post; budgetary reasons; competence of tribunal; decision; enforcement; executive head; general decision; individual decision; judicial review; legislative body;
Judgment 1128
71st Session, 1991
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"It is at the discretion of an international organisation to discontinue employment it has lost confidence in the staff member and no longer believes that he will show due respect for its good name, and the Tribunal will not interfere with the decision the organisation takes in the exercise of that discretion unless it finds one of the fatal flaws that warrant setting the decision aside. Such flaws include procedural defects, failure to take account of some essential fact and misuse of authority."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; organisation's reputation; staff member's duties; termination of employment;
Judgment 1127
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 30
Extract:
"A decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is at the Director General's discretion and, according to well-established precedent, a discretionary decision may be set aside only if it was taken without authority [etc.] "There will be especial caution in reviewing a decision not to confirm the appointment of a probationer in the light of the material criteria. "Where the reason for refusal of confirmation is, as in the present case, unsatisfactory performance the Tribunal will not replace with its own the organisation's assessment of the official's fitness."
Keywords:
appointment; discretion; judicial review; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not ordinarily question the competence and qualifications of those whom the Director General appoints in the exercise of his discretion to the Reports Committee, provided that the rules are complied with and the members' independence and impartiality are not in doubt."
Keywords:
advisory body; bias; competence; composition of the internal appeals body; discretion; executive head; judicial review; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1125
71st Session, 1991
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Where the Rule [viz. Article 25 of the 1956 Staff Rules] is silent the competent authority - here the Administrative Committee - does have discretion to set the amount of the contribution to be paid from the date of retirement. But its decision will not be immune to review by the Tribunal, which will interfere if it finds some mistake of fact or of law [etc.]". The decision to do away with the material benefit is in breach of Article 25 and cannot stand.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 25 OF THE 1956 STAFF RULES
Keywords:
amount; breach; contributions; discontinuance; discretion; judicial review; no provision; organisation; provision; staff regulations and rules;
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;
Consideration 13
Extract:
The Tribunal points out that, as it said in Judgment 986, it has only a limited power of review in respect of salary policy. It will declare whether the impugned decisions square with general principles, with the Staff Regulations and with the terms of the complainants' appointment. Those principles, which include that of trust, were complied with in the instant case.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 986
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; enforcement; general principle; good faith; judicial review; salary; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
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;
Consideration 22
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1123, consideration 13.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1123
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; enforcement; general principle; good faith; judicial review; salary; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Judgment 1116
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to consistent precedent the Director-General has discretion to extend a fixed-term appointment or convert it into an indeterminate one and his decision will be set aside only if taken without authority [etc]".
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; fixed-term; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; permanent appointment;
Judgment 1115
71st Session, 1991
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Tribunal has only a limited power of review in the matter of performance reports. It will not interfere unless the decision impugned has been based on a mistake of fact or of law [etc]".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; performance report;
< 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 >
|
