Complainant (56, 55, 71, 73, 74, 673, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 643, 682, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 75, 93, 534, 535, 659, 655, 704, 705, 59, 684, 698, 706, 760, 889, 758, 759,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Complainant
Total judgments found: 173
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 1391
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Decisions taken by the organisation are subject to review on grounds such as bias, bad faith, malice and abuse of authority. When seeking to defend his interests by impugning any such decision, an employee is entitled to allege and attempt to establish such grounds. A fair decision cannot be reached upon such matters by an internal appeals body or by this Tribunal if witnesses, parties and their representatives are unable to speak candidly and without the risk of incurring a penalty for what they may say, and especially if one party is unduly inhibited by the fear that failure to prove his case my make him liable to disciplinary action by the other party."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; burden of proof; complainant; complaint; disciplinary measure; evidence; freedom of speech; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; misuse of authority; submissions; testimony; tribunal;
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant was subject to disciplinary action for having made statements, some of them before the Tribunal, which allegedly impaired the organisation's and the Tribunal's reputations. The Disciplinary Committee asked whether the punishment of offensive remarks "for which there is no clear justification supported by evidence" would infringe the complainant's rights. The Tribunal holds that "such a test laid an undue burden on the complainant in that if he was to avoid the risk of disciplinary action he must prove the truth of his allegations. No such burden should have been put on him. The mere failure to prove the truth of his allegations did not mean that he had either abused his freedom of speech or forfeited the immunity or privilege of judicial proceedings."
Keywords:
burden of proof; complainant; complaint; criteria; disciplinary measure; evidence; freedom of speech; organisation's reputation; submissions; tribunal; vexatious complaint;
Consideration 11
Extract:
"A litigant whose submissions contain language that is unacceptable, or ill-chosen, or damaging, or unseemly, does not thereby lose the immunity that attaches to statements made in judicial proceedings".
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; freedom of speech; organisation's reputation; submissions; vexatious complaint;
Judgment 1324
76th Session, 1994
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant is seeking a change, to which the organisation is opposed, in the designation it originally made upon recruitment of his official home. "It would offend against the principle of equal treatment [for a new] recruit who has strong ties with the country of one of two nationalities [to] get the automatic designation of a place in that country as 'home', while in identical circumstances another employee is refused designation of his home in that country simply because he is seeking review of a determination already made."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; complainant; equal treatment; home; home leave; nationality; place of origin;
Judgment 1301
76th Session, 1994
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant is objecting to a decision to put in her personal file several performance appraisals which she alleges were drawn up in breach of the established procedure and contained "libellous comments". The ILO says that she refused to submit any comments of her own on the reports and thereby prevented the review procedure from moving ahead. "The requirement that a complainant go through any internal procedure is not just a formality. [...] By refusing to [make] comments on the draft reports she is challenging the complainant failed to avail herself of the means at her disposal to have the reports withdrawn or altered. Her complaint is therefore irreceivable under Article VII(1) of the Statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII(1) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; performance report; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; work appraisal;
Judgment 1266
75th Session, 1993
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1265, consideration 22.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000
Keywords:
cause of action; complainant; icsc decision;
Judgment 1265
75th Session, 1993
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
In Judgment 1000, under 12, the Tribunal held that "when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one". The complainants may therefore challenge "the lawfulness of any measure taken by the Commission that serves as the basis for the decisions affecting them, whatever method may have been adopted to import it into the organization's own rules."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000
Keywords:
case law; cause of action; complainant; decision; decision-maker; general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; judicial review;
Judgment 1250
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
The complainant's refusal of assignment to a post outside headquarters "was in breach of his obligation to the organization to comply with a transfer under Regulation 301.012. In view of the responsibilities of the post [to which he was assigned], that refusal impeded the effective operation of the organization [...] and amounted to misconduct."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: STAFF REGULATION 301.012
Keywords:
breach; complainant; definition; duty station; headquarters; organisation's interest; post; post description; refusal; serious misconduct; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
Consideration 20
Extract:
Had the complainant "made a bona fide challenge to the validity of transfer, that would have been a satisfactory explanation for non-compliance: for a precedent, see Judgment 392 [...], under 6. For family reasons the organization refrained for five months [...] from taking action on the decision to transfer the complainant. Thereafter he did not challenge the transfer but sought to circumvent or delay it by raising a series of questions and by evading a direct response."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 392
Keywords:
case law; complainant; decision; flaw; good faith; refusal; staff member's interest; transfer;
Judgment 1249
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The impugned decision [not to renew the complainant's appointment] was warranted neither by the WHO's concern for the purported interests of the country of the complainant's nationality nor by its desire to keep on good terms and work effectively with its membership. Relations with a member state may be good without the Organization's allowing any of its Member States the right to interfere in the area of personnel management."
Keywords:
complainant; contract; decision; fixed-term; independence; international civil service principles; member state; nationality; non-renewal of contract; organisation; place of origin;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The organization decided not to extend the complainant's appointment on the grounds that the authorities of his country were unwilling to release him any longer. "The organization makes out that, having derived from his status as a 'seconded' official the privilege of being relieved of going through the usual competitive process, the complainant may not, according to the doctrine of estoppel, 'take advantage of a special situation in his favour and then later deny the validity of this in order to obtain some further advantage'. The simple answer to that is that the organization bypassed the usual procedure because of an understanding it had with [a Member State]. So it may not properly expect the complainant to suffer for its own failure to follow the usual procedure as laid down in its rules."
Keywords:
appointment; breach; competition; complainant; contract; decision; enforcement; fixed-term; general principle; good faith; non-renewal of contract; procedure before the tribunal; secondment; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 4
Extract:
WHO put an end to the complainant's appointment on the grounds that the authorities of his country were unwilling to release him any longer. "The Director-General took himself to be bound by the attitude of the government of the Soviet Union. In doing so, he mistook the limits of his own discretion. As was held in Judgment 15 [...] among others, he must in exercising that discretion observe the general principles that govern the international civil service and safeguard the independence of organisation and official alike. The Director-General has committed a mistake of law."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 15
Keywords:
case law; complainant; contract; decision; discretion; executive head; extension of contract; fixed-term; independence; international civil service principles; limits; member state; nationality; non-renewal of contract; official; organisation; secondment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
The organization failed to renew the complainant's appointment on the grounds that the authorities of his country were unwilling to release him any longer. the director-general has "committed a mistake of fact by wrongly taking the complainant to be on secondment [...] the organization actually concedes the point in its surrejoinder: his appointment 'could not [...] be described as a true secondment'".
Keywords:
complainant; contract; decision; fixed-term; mistake of fact; non-renewal of contract; secondment;
Judgment 1247
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has held, for example in Judgment 607 [...], though proper administration requires the setting of time limits 'they are not supposed to be a trap or a means of catching out a staff member who acts in good faith'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 607
Keywords:
case law; complainant; good faith; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's interest; time limit;
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 1238
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Tribunal ordered the complainant's reinstatement in Judgment 999. But the Director-General decided that reinstatement was not in the interest of the organization and awarded him compensation. "To condemn someone to unemployment on account of a single negligent act unaccompanied by improper intention, and in circumstances that do not justify loss of confidence by the employer, is to demand a humanly impossible standard of performance by the employee and makes the right to reinstatement illusory."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 999
Keywords:
complainant; discretion; good faith; limits; negligence; organisation; organisation's interest; proportionality; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Even if the Director-General has discretion to refuse reinstatement 'in the interest of the organization' he must exercise it fairly and reasonably after considering all the material facts. Here the facts were that the complainant had throughout had irreproachable appraisal reports. [...] Despite surveillance, without his knowledge, for six months prior to [the incident that led to his dismissal] no wrongdoing, negligence or irregularity on his part was discovered. [...] The Director-General has failed to take into consideration the above material facts and has erred in treating the complainant as guilty of a 'cover-up'. The refusal of reinstatement was thus not a proper exercise of whatever discretion he had in the matter."
Keywords:
complainant; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; limits; mistake of fact; negligence; organisation; organisation's interest; performance report; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Judgment 1221
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The complainant's appointment expired on 31 March 1992 and there was no reason why the organization should renew it. In the light of all the material circumstances, including her behaviour, the Tribunal disallows her claim to reinstatement."
Keywords:
complainant; conduct; contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; refusal; reinstatement; request by a party; tribunal;
Consideration 1
Extract:
Since the three complaints before the Tribunal "are about the personal status of one official and the disputes arose out of the same facts, [the complainant's] application for joinder is allowed."
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; identical facts; joinder; procedure before the tribunal;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is plain on the evidence that the bureau of personnel told the complainant that the Director-General would be willing to waive the Appeals Board's jurisdiction [under UNESCO Staff Rule 111.2(b)] if she so wished, that she expressly agreed to the suggestion, and that she formally sought and was granted waiver by the Director-General." So the complainant appealed directly to the Tribunal "in full freedom".
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 111.2(B)
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; direct appeal to tribunal; internal remedies exhausted; lack of consent; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 1127
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant suggests that the Reports Committee which recommended against confirming her appointment following probation was biased. "The burden is on the complainant to show that the members of the Committee duly appointed by the Director General were not impartial, and she has failed to offer any evidence to suggest that they were not."
Keywords:
advisory body; bias; burden of proof; complainant; composition of the internal appeals body; discretion; evidence; executive head;
Judgment 1125
71st Session, 1991
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant wants the Organisation to continue making contributions into a savings fund for the benefit of her heirs after the date of her retirement. "[H]er own lack of financial entitlement does not bar her from asking the Tribunal to enforce a provision of the material regulations."
Keywords:
cause of action; competence of tribunal; complainant; receivability of the complaint; successor;
Judgment 1115
71st Session, 1991
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Organization objects to [the] production [of certain items of evidence] on the grounds of privilege but not to the Tribunal's seeing the documents and ruling on the plea of privilege. The complainant being in agreement with that course of action, the Tribunal has ordered the Organization to disclose to it the notes and correspondence. Having read the documents disclosed, the Tribunal upholds the plea of privilege."
Keywords:
appraisal of evidence; complainant; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; request by a party; tribunal;
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant wants the Tribunal to set aside two reports which describe his work as unsatisfactory as well as decisions to suspend his salary step increase and not to extend his appointment. He alleges bad faith and abuse of authority on the part of the administration. There is conflicting evidence. "A complainant must discharge the burden of proof and satisfy an internal appeal body or the Tribunal that the balance of probability is that his allegations of fact are true. [...] The Tribunal has [...] considered all the evidence, including a transcript of a recording the complainant secretly made of a conversation with his supervisor. It finds that he has not discharged the burden of proving his allegations".
Keywords:
abuse of power; appraisal of evidence; burden of proof; complainant; conduct; contract; evidence; fixed-term; good faith; increment withheld; lack of evidence; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; performance report; recording; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1070
70th Session, 1991
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7, Summary
Extract:
The complainant submitted a claim for medical expenses incurred by his former wife which another insurance scheme had already met. He submits that he bore no responsibility for the error and acted in good faith. The Tribunal holds that as he knew that his former wife was covered under another health scheme he should have made sure that it had not previously refunded her expenses. The complainant's "conduct argues, to say the least, a degree of laxity quite inadmissible in an international civil servant in that he wilfully ran a substantial and unreasonable risk, the foreseeable outcome being the defrauding of the fund. He has only himself to blame for the consequences of his own oversight."
Keywords:
complainant; fitness for international civil service; good faith; health insurance; insurance; medical expenses; misrepresentation; negligence; request by a party; serious misconduct; staff member's duties;
Judgment 1020
69th Session, 1990
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant initially accepted the transfer but later changed his mind. He must be deemed never to have consented to leaving his posts. "If there was anything retroactive about the period of notice, that was attributable, not to any decision of Interpol's, but to his own shift of position."
Keywords:
acceptance; complainant; non-retroactivity; refusal; transfer;
Judgment 1019
69th Session, 1990
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainants initially accepted the transfer but later changed their minds. They must be deemed never to have consented to leaving their posts. "If there was anything retroactive about the period of notice, that was attributable, not to any decision of Interpol's, but to their own shift of position."
Keywords:
acceptance; complainant; non-retroactivity; refusal; transfer;
Judgment 995
68th Session, 1990
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
According to paragraphs 7 and 9 of the Statutes of the UNESCO Appeals Board, appeals must be presented by the official concerned or, on his behalf, by any other member of the Secretariat stationed at headquarters. The complainant was represented by a lawyer before the Appeals Board and thereby failed to comply with the prescribed procedure. His complaint is accordingly irreceivable. The Tribunal remarks that as lawyers ordinarily have access to any judicial body the rules governing the internal appeals procedure would not be admissible before a court of law. But under the circumstances of the instant case the rules in the Board's Statutes must be construed strictly.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PARAGRAPHS 7 AND 9 OF THE STATUTES OF THE UNESCO APPEALS BOARD
Keywords:
complainant; counsel; enforcement; formal requirements; internal appeal; internal appeals body; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 971
66th Session, 1989
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The complainant claims payment under Annex C. But only the WHO, not the complainant, is entitled to payment under this annex, which concerns its insurance policy. The policy is exclusively a matter between the WHO and its insurers. In application of its administrative practice, as reflected in paragraph 365 of Manual II.7, the organization does hand the difference over to the staff member if the sum it has actually received from the insurers more than covers its liability to him."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO MANUAL PROVISION II.7
Keywords:
amount; complainant; difference; health insurance; insurance; organisation; payment; practice;
Judgment 959
66th Session, 1989
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant maintains that he is entitled to have refunded to him any tax that was levied on his ilo salary and made over to the Indonesian government. [...] The ILO explained to him that if he could satisfy it that he himself had paid tax to the government it would reimburse the sum, and indeed that offer holds good. But the complainant has never offered any evidence of such payment, and his claim must therefore fail."
Keywords:
burden of proof; complainant; evidence; lack of evidence; payment; refund; right; tax;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
