Date (597,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Date
Total judgments found: 130
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
Judgment 2312
96th Session, 2004
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant asserts that she was not given reasons for the decision not to renew her contract prior to the decision being taken. [...] The right to receive written reasons [...] implies the right to be given detailed reasons for a decision once it has been made, not prior to its making. This right ensures that an appeal can properly be taken from that decision."
Keywords:
condition; consequence; contract; date; date of notification; decision; grounds; non-renewal of contract; purpose; right; right of appeal;
Judgment 2255
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 12-13
Extract:
"The organization did not contest the receivability of the appeals to the appeals board and does not now contest that the complaints were timely filed in accordance with the Tribunal's Statute. Notwithstanding these facts, however, UNESCO now argues that the internal appeals to the Appeals Board were irreceivable and that accordingly, the complaints to the Tribunal are also irreceivable. [...] In Judgment 522, the Tribunal was faced with the identical situation and held: "There can be no doubt that the appropriate, if not the only, time to take the point was before the Appeals Board, since it is the proceedings before the Board that are said to be out of time [...] and not the proceedings before the Tribunal itself. The Tribunal has therefore now to consider whether or not justice requires that the organization should be given a second opportunity to take the point. Three factors ought to be considered. The first is whether the point is a clear and compelling one. The second is whether there is an adequate explanation of the organization's failure to take it. The third is whether the complainant may be prejudiced by the organizations's failure.' " The Tribunal applies, in the present case, the criteria set out in Judgment 552.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 522
Keywords:
case law; complaint; date; injury; internal appeal; new plea; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 2170
94th Session, 2003
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The Organisation withheld the complainant's salary increment on the grounds that more time was needed to assess her performance. The Tribunal concludes from the relevant provisions that "the requirement that an annual performance report be established prior to the scheduled date of the annual salary increment is a formal one. The salary increment [...] was not preceded by an evaluation [...] it is the Organisation's responsibility to see to it that [an annual performance] report is prepared on time. a staff member's right to an increment cannot be defeated by the organisation's failure to comply with its own rules."
Keywords:
applicable law; binding character; breach; consequence; date; grounds; increase; increment; increment withheld; official; organisation; organisation's duties; performance report; provision; refusal; right; salary; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 2130
93rd Session, 2002
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
The relief sought by the complainant is that he be granted special leave with pay for the months of November 1999, December 1999 and January 2000. He "was informed that his appointment would be terminated as of 24 December 1999. He does not dispute that he was paid up to that date. Obviously, he cannot claim special leave with pay for any period during which he received his regular salary. Equally obviously, from 24 December 1999 to the end of January 2000, he was no longer on the staff and there can be no basis to his claim for special leave, with or without pay."
Keywords:
date; period; refusal; request by a party; salary; separation from service; special leave; status of complainant;
Judgment 2112
92nd Session, 2002
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7(a)
Extract:
"A decision affecting an official will always be preceded by administrative formalities, but it will become binding on the organisation only when it is notified to the official, in the manner prescribed by the organisation (see Judgment 1560, under 9). Notification may also take some other form as long as it can be inferred from it that the organisation intended to notify the decision. But information about the formalities themselves is clearly not notification. In the interests of clarity it is desirable, and indeed often the practice, for the person concerned by some future decision to be given such information. But to see it as notification of a decision would be wrong and could lead to serious confusion."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1560
Keywords:
administrative instruction; binding character; condition; date; decision; definition; duty to inform; effect; formal requirements; purport;
Judgment 2076
91st Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant was promoted with retroactive effect. "The complainant claims interest on the amounts the organization owes him. [Since it] agreed to promote him to G.5 with retroactive effect to 1 September 1997 [...] it should have paid him each month from that date the salary and entitlements corresponding to grade G.5. He is therefore entitled to interest, which the Tribunal sets at 8 per cent a year on those monthly earnings from each due date as from 1 September 1997."
Keywords:
date; debt; effective date; grade; interest on damages; promotion; request by a party; salary; tribunal;
Judgment 2065
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
"In this application the complainant is challenging the decision of 31 August 2000 [...] However, the President's new decision of 11 April 2001 [...] has deprived the application of a cause of action. Since he claims costs, it must be determined whether the complainant did have a cause of action at the time of filing this application on 11 October 2000."
Keywords:
application for execution; cause of action; claim; costs; date; decision; executive head; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 2057
91st Session, 2001
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
Following Judgments 1682 and 1887, adjustments of the 1995-1996 salary scales have been retroactively raised. The organisation paid the difference in salary but did not adjust the salary scales for the following years (those salary scales had been calculated based on the old 1995-1996 salary scales). The Tribunal states that "the [organisation]'s retroactive reconstitution of the adjustments had the paradoxical effect of limiting the application of the [...] staff's improved salary scales to a single year, and of reducing their salary levels [...] after [...] 1996. The result is an impairment of rights: staff are entitled to expect that any adjustments to their pay will be made on the basis of the salary scales which were established lawfully for the period preceding the adjustment."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1682, 1887
Keywords:
accumulation; adjustment; date; effect; increase; official; purport; right; salary; scale;
Judgment 2037
90th Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainants challenge the appointment of another staff member. The Appeals Committee considered that the appeals had not been filed in time. But the complainants argue that the challenged appointment was not definitive until the offer had been signed and the conditions for appointment satisfied. "When what is challenged is a contract between an organisation and a future employee, the act which may be impugned is the contract as communicated by the organisation, irrespective of the possibilities open to the contracting parties to appeal internally such as a medical examination still to be undergone [...] legal certainty requires communications from an organisation to be reliable so that all concerned know when the time limit for an appeal starts to run. this is all the more important when the organisation is not bound to reveal the exact content of the contract. In this instance, [...] since the organisation had already notified its decision and its agreement with the future [staff member] on his terms of appointment, the signing of the contract and the prior medical examination appeared to be mere formalities. It would have been sheer pedantry to insist that they be completed and the staff so informed before the appointment of the [staff member] was announced." The time limit for an appeal had therefore started to run as soon as the personnel had been informed of the contested appointment.
Keywords:
appointment; cause of action; contract; date; decision; duty to inform; formal requirements; good faith; internal appeal; medical examination; offer; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 2018
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
The decision not to confirm the complainant's appointment after a probationary period and to terminate his employment prior to the expiry of his fixed-term contract is quashed. "The complainant is entitled to be reinstated in his post or in one of an equivalent grade with full salary and benefits (including any salary increases which he would have received if he had not been terminated) to the end of his fixed-term appointment."
Keywords:
allowance; condition; contract; date; fixed-term; grade; increase; post; post held by the complainant; probationary period; reconstruction of career; refusal; reinstatement; right; salary; termination of employment;
Judgment 2017
90th Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2(A)
Extract:
"The complainant enjoyed the status of official from October 1974 to the end of December 1992. From 1 January 1993 to 31 December 1994 he was employed on the basis of special agreements, which contained an arbitration clause providing for an "arbitral panel" composed of three members. The Tribunal's jurisdiction is therefore limited to the effects of the relationship between the [organisation] and the complainant from October 1974 to the end of December 1992."
Keywords:
arbitration; competence of tribunal; contract; date; external collaborator; limits; ratione personae; status of complainant;
Judgment 2006
90th Session, 2001
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant contends that based on a recently published circular, his promotion should have been made retroactive to the date he took up his new duties. "However, to give retroactive effect to [the] circular would not be possible since according to customary methods of interpretation any action prescribed in a text is deemed to be of immediate effect. There is no presumption of retroactive effect.' (Judgment 742 [...]). Indeed, there can be no retroactive application of the rights sought by the complainant, and his status results only from the publication of the circular in question. The charge of arbitrariness would be tenable if there were no basis for applying the circular to the case of the complainant, but, as shown above, the scope of the text explicitly covered his situation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 742
Keywords:
bias; date; effective date; general principle; interpretation; non-retroactivity; promotion; publication; right; staff regulations and rules; written rule;
Judgment 1916
88th Session, 2000
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant argued that the date the contract enters into force is not negotiable - it must be the date the parties actually sign the contract. "The Tribunal does not agree with the complainant. A contract is concluded when there is a firm and definitive unity of intentions between the contracting parties; it generally takes the form, particularly where, as in this case, it consists of a contract by correspondence, of an offer made by one party followed by the acceptance of the offer by the other party. [...] But in certain instances, the contract may be held to be concluded, by interpretation of the intentions of the parties, even in the absence of agreement on the subsidiary points."
Keywords:
acceptance; date; effective date; general principle; intention of parties; law of contract; offer;
Judgment 1911
88th Session, 2000
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
"It is a general principle of the international civil service that there must be a valid reason for any decision not to renew a fixed-term contract and that the reason must be given to the staff member [...]. An official whose fixed-term contract is reaching expiry must be informed in a timely manner of the real reasons for the decision not to renew it [...]. In this case a mere reference to a letter sent to the complainant nearly two years previously cannot, in the absence of any other indication as to the real reasons for the decision to be taken, exempt the observatory from stating the grounds clearly."
Keywords:
contract; date; decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; general principle; grounds; international civil service principles; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; separation from service;
Judgment 1886
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant accepted an offer for a permanent contract which provided that the contract would be governed by the Staff Rules and Regulations valid as of 1 January 1997 (which would reduce his expatriation allowance). "By confining himself to the phrase 'without prejudice of my acquired rights', the complainant showed that he had no reason in principle to refuse the offer made to him, but that he merely wished to maintain his right to continue receiving the expatriation allowance at the former rate [...]. [I]n view of the above, and the fact that the [organisation] neither modified, nor proposed to modify its offer, despite the complainant's reservation, it has to be deduced that the employment relationship between the complainant and the [organisation] is based on a contract concluded after 1 January 1997. It is therefore a priori governed by the Staff Rules and Regulations which were in force at that date [...]."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; contract; date; effective date; intention of parties; non-resident allowance; offer; permanent appointment; rate; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1864
87th Session, 1999
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2, 5 and 6
Extract:
"Article 72(1) [of the Service Regulations] rules that employees who are nationals of a country other than the one they work in have no right to an expatriation allowance if, when taking up their duties, they had already been permanently resident there for more than three years. [W]hile the system could certainly be improved, it is in line with legal requirements that the applicable rules should precisely define the notion of 'expatriation', and fix a length of residence in the country prior to employment beyond which an employee may not be considered as expatriate. [N]aturally, the length of residence to be taken into account in order to make the distinction may be challenged, but in this matter the tribunal recognises the organisation's discretion, provided that the exercise of such power has no adverse consequences. in this case, a period of three years' residence beyond which the complainants may not be considered as 'expatriates' would appear reasonable."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 72 (1) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
ILOAT Judgment(s): 754
Keywords:
date; duty station; nationality; non-resident allowance; residence; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1757
85th Session, 1998
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Transfer is such an important decision that it must be properly accounted for. For one thing, that helps the staff member to make up his mind about what to do, for example lodge an appeal; for another, it allows review of the lawfulness of the decision. Yet the reasons need not be stated in the actual text notifying transfer: they may have been conveyed beforehand or later, even in the course of internal appeal proceedings."
Keywords:
date; decision; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; organisation's duties; right of appeal; transfer;
Judgment 1736
85th Session, 1998
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Of course the first report should have been done earlier and the complainant is right enough to cite Rule 540.1. but [...] he was himself largely to blame for the delay, not having filled up the report form until [a given date]. Besides, his second- level supervisor had told him orally, before putting it in the report, that he was not cooperative enough. It is plain on the evidence that he knew full well that his performance had been found wanting; so he may not properly argue that he was told too late to be able to improve."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: STAFF RULE 540.1
Keywords:
complainant; date; delay; duty to inform; liability; performance report; period; staff regulations and rules; work appraisal;
Judgment 1643
83rd Session, 1997
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
It is true that the suspension of the unit in which the complainant was employed was based on a mistake about the date of expiry of her contract. But she was aware of the mistake and knew full well what she was doing when she accepted the impugned decision. "So she may not plead lack of consent."
Keywords:
abolition of post; acceptance; contract; date; decision; duration of appointment; lack of consent; secondment;
Judgment 1601
82nd Session, 1997
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Since the reversal of the disputed measures came only after the filing of the complaints and the complainants were therefore put to needless expense, their claim to costs succeeds. Eurocontrol's counterclaim to an award of costs against the complainants is dismissed."
Keywords:
complaint; costs; counterclaim; date; withdrawal of decision;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
|
