ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

Condition (589,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Condition
Total judgments found: 322

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 | next >



  • Judgment 2704


    104th Session, 2008
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The principle of freedom of association is infringed if a person is subject to a detriment or disability or is discriminated against because of his or her activities within a staff association or [...] within the Staff Council."

    Keywords:

    breach; cause; condition; equal treatment; freedom of association; general principle; injury; official; staff union; staff union activity;



  • Judgment 2696


    104th Session, 2008
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "It was said in Judgment 832 that an acquired right is one that a staff member may expect to survive alteration of the staff rules (see also Judgment 1226). The right may derive from the terms of appointment, the staff rules or from a decision. In Judgment 61 it was said that the amendment of a rule to an official's detriment and without his consent amounts to a breach of an acquired right when the structure of the contract of appointment is disturbed or there is impairment of any fundamental term of appointment in consideration of which the official accepted appointment."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 61, 832, 1226

    Keywords:

    acquired right; amendment to the rules; breach; condition; consequence; contract; decision; definition; injury; official; provision; request by a party; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment; written rule;



  • Judgment 2693


    104th Session, 2008
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal's judgments have the authority of res judicata. They will be reviewed only in exceptional circumstances and on limited grounds. These grounds include the discovery of a new fact. A new fact is a fact on which the party claiming it was unable to rely through no fault of its own; it must be a material fact likely to have a bearing on the outcome of the case (see Judgments 748, under 3, 1294, under 2, 1504, under 8 and 2270, under 2)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 748, 1294, 1504, 2270

    Keywords:

    admissible grounds for review; application for review; condition; definition; exception; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; limits; misconduct; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; res judicata;



  • Judgment 2682


    104th Session, 2008
    International Olive Oil Council
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "[A]ccording to the case law as established in Judgment 61, clarified in Judgment 832 and confirmed in Judgment 986, an acquired right is breached only when [...] an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations by altering fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on. In order to determine whether there has been a breach of acquired rights, it is therefore necessary to ascertain whether the altered terms of employment are fundamental and essential within the meaning of Judgment 832."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 61, 832, 986

    Keywords:

    acquired right; amendment to the rules; breach; condition; contract; law of contract; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "As the Tribunal has already indicated in [...] Judgment 832, when weighing up the consequences of a breach of an acquired right, the financial situation of the organisation applying the terms of appointment in question cannot be discounted."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 832

    Keywords:

    acquired right; breach; budgetary reasons; condition; consequence; organisation's interest;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "While the terms of a contract and some decisions will in principle give rise to acquired rights, this is not necessarily true in all circumstances of provisions of staff regulations and rules."

    Keywords:

    acquired right; condition; contract; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2678


    104th Session, 2008
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    "Although the impugned decision must be set aside, it does not follow, as claimed by the complainant, that he is entitled to material damages on the basis that his contract should have been renewed [...]. A fixed-term contract carries no right to renewal. Moreover, there is no basis for assuming that a proper evaluation and review of the complainant's performance [...] would have resulted in any extension of his contract. However, he lost a valuable opportunity to have the question of renewal considered on the basis of a proper review of his performance [...]. The loss of that opportunity warrants an award of material damages in the amount of 7,500 euros."

    Keywords:

    compensation; condition; contract; decision; extension of contract; fixed-term; injury; legitimate expectation; material damages;



  • Judgment 2668


    104th Session, 2008
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "Personal promotion constitutes advancement on merit and is supposed to reward a staff member for services of a quality higher than those ordinarily expected of the holder of the post. In the absence of any provision to the contrary, it is an optional and exceptional discretionary measure which is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal (see Judgments 1500, under 4, and 1973, under 5)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1500, 1973

    Keywords:

    condition; discretion; judicial review; personal promotion;



  • Judgment 2667


    104th Session, 2008
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The duty to act independently and impartially is incumbent not only on the authority competent for issuing the final formal decision in proceedings, but also on bodies responsible for giving an advisory opinion or for making a recommendation to this authority, a fortiori where the recommendation is a formal part of the decision-making process (see Judgment 2315, under 27)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2315

    Keywords:

    advisory body; advisory opinion; condition; decision; disciplinary procedure; due process; independence; procedure before the tribunal; recommendation;



  • Judgment 2661


    103rd Session, 2007
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    "In Judgment 809 the Tribunal held that, in order to justify the imposition of special leave, the Organisation must show 'that use was not made of the special leave for any purpose extraneous to the Organization's interests and that the arrangement was a reasonable though not necessarily the only reasonable way out of the dilemma'. However, it must be noted that this statement was made in a context where a staff member had been required to take special leave until a new post was found."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 809

    Keywords:

    condition; interpretation; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; purpose; special leave; transitional measures;



  • Judgment 2657


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant contests the decision not to appoint him to a post as examiner at the European Patent Office on the grounds that he did not meet the physical requirements for the post but the Tribunal considers that persons who have applied for a post in an international organisation and who have not been recruited are barred from access to the Tribunal. The complainant asks that the Organisation be ordered to waive its immunity to enable him to bring proceedings before a German court. "[T]he Tribunal [recalls that it] has no authority to order the EPO to waive its immunity (see Judgment 933, under 6). It notes, however, that the present judgment creates a legal vacuum and considers it highly desirable that the Organisation should seek a solution affording the complainant access to a court, either by waiving its immunity or by submitting the dispute to arbitration."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 933

    Keywords:

    appointment; arbitration; candidate; claim; competence of tribunal; condition; grounds; handicapped person; judgment of the tribunal; medical examination; medical fitness; municipal court; open competition; organisation; post; refusal; safeguard; waiver of immunity;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant contests the decision not to appoint him to a post as examiner at the European Patent Office on the grounds that he did not meet the physical requirements for the post. The Organisation submits that the Tribunal is not competent to hear complaints from external applicants for a post in an organisation that has recognised its jurisdiction. "However regrettable a decision declining jurisdiction may be, in that the complainant is liable to feel that he is the victim of a denial of justice, the Tribunal has no option but to confirm the well-established case law according to which it is a court of limited jurisdiction and 'bound to apply the mandatory provisions governing its competence', as stated in Judgment 67, delivered on 26 October 1962. [...]
    It [can be inferred from Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal] that persons who are applicants for a post in an international organisation but who have not been recruited are barred from access to the Tribunal. It is only in a case where, even in the absence of a contract signed by the parties, the commitments made by the two sides are equivalent to a contract that the Tribunal can decide to retain jurisdiction (see for example Judgment 339). According to Judgment 621, there must be 'an unquestioned and unqualified concordance of will on all terms of the relationship'. That is not the case, however, in the present circumstances: while proposals regarding an appointment were unquestionably made to the complainant, the defendant was not bound by them until it had established that the conditions governing appointments laid down in the regulations were met."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 67, 339, 621

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; case law; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; consequence; contract; declaration of recognition; definition; exception; external candidate; formal requirements; grounds; handicapped person; iloat statute; intention of parties; interpretation; medical examination; medical fitness; open competition; organisation; post; proposal; provision; refusal; terms of appointment; vested competence; written rule;



  • Judgment 2654


    103rd Session, 2007
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The complainant requests that UNESCO recognise that she has been subjected to moral harassment and acknowledge all the repercussions this has had on her "human dignity and professional life". The Organization asks the Tribunal to find that there is no factual or legal basis to the complainant's claim that she notified the Administration of a case of moral harassment. The Tribunal considers "that the complainant did accuse her supervisor of harassment, and that the Organization, which was then under an obligation to initiate an objective inquiry into the validity of her accusations, failed to do so and has merely regretted the fact that it held no investigations.
    By failing to conduct an inquiry to determine the validity of such serious accusations, the defendant breached both its duty of care towards one of its staff members and its duty of good governance, thereby depriving the complainant of her right to be given an opportunity to prove her allegations."

    Keywords:

    breach; burden of proof; career; claim; condition; consequence; duty of care; harassment; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; right; supervisor; working conditions; working relations;



  • Judgment 2649


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    Acting in his capacity as Chairman of the Staff Committee of the EPO's sub-office in Vienna, the complainant submitted a request to the President of the Office that the "staff salary scales mentioned in the annex to Part 2 of the Codex" be forwarded to all agencies supplying temporary personnel to the Office. The President refused to grant the request submitted to him, denying that temporary workers were entitled to remuneration equal to that of EPO staff and underlining that neither the Service Regulations nor the conditions of employment for contract staff applied to temporary workers. The EPO submits that the complainant does not have locus standi to represent temporary workers supplied to the Office. "It is well settled that members of the Staff Committee may rely on their position as such to ensure observance of the Service Regulations (see Judgments 1147 and 1897); but in order for a complaint submitted to the Tribunal on behalf of a Staff Committee to be receivable, it must allege a breach of guarantees which the Organisation is legally bound to provide to staff who are connected with the Office by an employment contract or who have permanent employee status, this being a sine qua non for the Tribunal's jurisdiction. In the absence of such a connection resting on a contract or deriving from status, the claim that the Office should forward its salary scales to agencies supplying temporary personnel - whose conditions of employment and remuneration are in any event beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal - cannot be entertained."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1147, 1897

    Keywords:

    breach; claim; communication to third party; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; contract; enforcement; equal treatment; executive head; external collaborator; locus standi; no provision; official; organisation's duties; provision; receivability of the complaint; refusal; request by a party; right; safeguard; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union; terms of appointment; vested competence;



  • Judgment 2647


    103rd Session, 2007
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    An external candidate was appointed to the post the complainant had applied for. The complainant contends that, contrary to the Staff Regulations, the applications of candidates already in the Organization's service were not given priority of consideration over those of external candidates. "It is convenient to recall that the Tribunal held in Judgment 107, under 1, that:
    'although the Organization is bound to have full regard to the qualifications and experience of persons already in its service, this does not mean that it must necessarily always appoint them in preference to outside applicants. If this privilege were automatically to be granted to the serving staff, the Organization might be led to take decisions contrary to its own interests, a situation which was certainly not intended by those who drafted the Staff Regulations. The position is that persons already in the service of the Organization have priority only if their qualifications appear to be at least equal to those of other candidates.'
    Those principles were duly taken into account in the selection process, which was carefully and correctly conducted by the Organization, and while the qualifications and experience of the complainant are to be noted, they do not automatically give her a right of precedence over other candidates for the advertised post."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 107

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; competition; condition; decision; general principle; internal candidate; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; priority; procedure before the tribunal; professional experience; provision; purpose; qualifications; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2632


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "[A]s the Tribunal stated in Judgment 1712, under 10, recalling a firm precedent, 'there may be a cause of action even if there is no present injury: time may go by before the impugned decision causes actual injury. The necessary, yet sufficient, condition of a cause of action is a reasonable presumption that the decision will bring injury. The decision must have some present effect on the complainant's position.'"

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1712

    Keywords:

    cause of action; complainant; condition; consequence; effect; injury; period;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "[T]he complainants assert that their acquired rights were breached because the Agency abandoned a practice, applied to them from 1 January to 30 June 2005, involving the application to pensions of the same weightings as were applied to the remuneration of serving officials. But a practice of salary and pension adjustment, even where repeated, does not bind the Organisation that adopted it, which is at liberty to abandon it provided that it does so lawfully (see in this connection Judgment 2089). As for acquired rights, they could not be held to have been breached unless the contested reform impaired a fundamental and essential term of the complainants' conditions of appointment, which include the right to a pension (see aforementioned Judgment 2089 and the case law cited therein). This is clearly not the case here."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2089

    Keywords:

    acquired right; adjustment; amendment to the rules; breach; condition; cost-of-living weighting; discretion; enforcement; formal requirements; injury; organisation's duties; pension; pension adjustment system; pension entitlements; practice; salary; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2631


    103rd Session, 2007
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "Under Article VII(3) of the Statute of the Tribunal, an official may have direct recourse to the Tribunal where the Administration fails to take a decision on any claim “within sixty days from the notification of the claim to it”. Only a person who has done all that is legally possible to secure a final decision within a reasonable time, but to no avail, is entitled to file a complaint against an implicit rejection (see, inter alia, Judgments 1344, under 11, and 1718, under 3).
    Article VII(3) of the Tribunal's Statute must be read in conjunction with Article VII(1), which establishes the obligation to exhaust internal means of redress before filing a complaint with the Tribunal. It follows that a complaint against an implicit decision to reject a claim is not receivable unless the complainant has exhausted all available internal remedies. The Tribunal cannot therefore hear such a complaint unless the implicit rejection may be inferred from the silence of the final authority competent to rule on the dispute between the official and the Administration (see Judgment 185)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 185

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; complaint; condition; direct appeal to tribunal; failure to answer claim; iloat statute; implied decision; internal remedies exhausted; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; staff member's duties;



  • Judgment 2630


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "[A]s held in Judgment 1712, '[t]he necessary, yet sufficient, condition of a cause of action is a reasonable presumption that the decision will bring injury'. Moreover, the case law has it that 'receivability does not depend on proving actual and certain injury', all that a complainant need show is that the decision under challenge 'may impair the rights and safeguards that an international civil servant claims under staff regulations or contract of employment' (see Judgment 1330, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1330, 1712

    Keywords:

    cause of action; complaint; condition; consequence; contract; decision; effect; injury; official; receivability of the complaint; right; safeguard; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2629


    103rd Session, 2007
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "Ordinarily, there is no decision with respect to matters falling outside normal entitlements until a specific claim is made and either expressly or impliedly accepted or rejected (see Judgment 2538). [...] However, it is well settled that a decision does not require any particular formality and may be constituted by any communication that is reasonably capable of being understood to constitute a decision on the matter (see Judgments 532 and 2573)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 532, 2538, 2573

    Keywords:

    condition; decision; definition; express decision; formal requirements; implied decision; refusal; request by a party; right;



  • Judgment 2583


    102nd Session, 2007
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "[A]ccording to precedent (see for example Judgments 1330 and 2204), staff members have an obvious interest in ascertaining the value of their pension rights as soon as possible, even if they are still serving: the receivability of their action does not depend on proving actual and certain injury, but on their having an interest in obtaining recognition of their future rights, regardless of whether their pleadings are well founded."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1330, 2204

    Keywords:

    amount; case law; condition; consequence; injury; pension entitlements; receivability of the complaint; staff member's interest; subsidiary;



  • Judgment 2567


    101st Session, 2006
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "[I]t must be recalled that according to Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal '[a] complaint shall not be receivable unless the decision impugned is a final decision and the person concerned has exhausted such other means of resisting it as are open to him under the applicable Staff Regulations'. The Tribunal will on its own motion examine whether this condition of receivability is met (see Judgments 60, 1082 and 1095).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 60, 1082, 1095

    Keywords:

    application of law ex officio; complaint; condition; decision; iloat; iloat statute; internal remedies exhausted; provision; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2565


    101st Session, 2006
    World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7(a)

    Extract:

    "According to a general principle of law, whoever has paid a sum mistakenly is entitled to recover it within a reasonable time provided the person can prove that the sum was paid in the mistaken belief that it was owed (see Judgments 497, under 6, and 1195, under 3)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 497, 1195

    Keywords:

    amount; burden of proof; condition; general principle; payment; reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; right; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 2556


    101st Session, 2006
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "It is well settled that the principle of equality requires the equal application of the relevant law, not its equal misapplication."

    Keywords:

    condition; definition; enforcement; equal treatment; general principle; written rule;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 | next >


 
Last updated: 05.07.2024 ^ top