Duty of care (645,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Duty of care
Total judgments found: 137
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
Judgment 3204
115th Session, 2013
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant claims moral damages for the Union’s failure to submit to its Council the matter of the recognition of same-sex marriages.
Consideration 9
Extract:
"It is settled by the Tribunal’s case law that, according to the rules of good faith, anyone who was a staff member of an organisation and to whom a promise was made, may expect that promise to be kept by the organisation. However, the right to fulfilment of the promise is conditional. One condition is that the promise should be substantive. Another is that the promise is from someone who is competent or deemed competent to make it. Yet another is that the breach should cause injury to the person who relies on the promise (see Judgment 782)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 782
Keywords:
condition; definition; duty of care; formal requirements; good faith; organisation's duties; promise; staff member's duties; staff member's interest;
Judgment 3200
115th Session, 2013
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on her the disciplinary measure of demotion.
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Although the case was complex and detailed, and the subject matter sensitive, the time taken to complete the proceedings was indeed excessive. The Tribunal notes in particular that it took OSDI ten months to bring the investigation to a conclusion following the interviews, and it took the Director General seven months to reject the appeal after receiving the Appeals Committee Report. The total length of the proceedings cannot therefore be considered reasonable, and specifically, the two intervals of time noted above were excessive. The conclusion is that the Organization did not respect the need for expeditious proceedings and violated its duty of care towards the complainant."
Keywords:
administrative delay; delay; duty of care; internal appeal; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; staff member's interest;
Judgment 3189
114th Session, 2013
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants unsuccessfully challenge their placement in the new grade structure following the entry into force of the administrative reform at Eurocontrol.
Consideration 8
Extract:
"[The] duty of care [...] does not in any way imply a duty always to interpret texts in the staff’s favour."
Keywords:
duty of care; interpretation; interpretation of rules; judicial review; organisation's duties; written rule;
Judgment 3188
114th Session, 2013
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions not to update her job description, not to select her for a G-6 position and her alleged subsequent demotion.
Consideration 25
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has repeatedly observed, internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and with regard to the care owed by an international organisation to its staff (see for example Judgment 2522, under 7). While the time an appeal might reasonably take will often depend on the particular circumstances of a given case, it has been said by the Tribunal in Judgment 2902, under 16, that “by any standards a delay of nearly 19 months to complete the internal appeal process is unreasonable”."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2522, 2902
Keywords:
delay; duty of care; internal appeal; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; staff member's interest; time limit;
Judgment 3148
113th Session, 2012
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
[W]hile it is true that where a staff member has received assurances, in accordance with the principle of good faith, he or she is entitled to demand the fulfilment of his or her expectations, consistent precedent has it that the right to fulfilment of a promise is subject to the condition that it must be substantive, i.e. to act, or not to act, or to allow, that it should come from someone who is competent or deemed competent to make it; that breach should cause injury to him or her who relies on it; and that the position in law should not have altered between the date of the promise and the date on which fulfilment is due (see, for example, Judgments 782, under 1, and 3005, under 12).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 782, 3005
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; promise;
Judgment 3138
113th Session, 2012
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
Irrespective of the question of whether the duration of the complainant’s suspension was reasonable, it must be found that the Union breached its duty of care towards her by leaving her in a state of uncertainty […] as to the possible adoption of a disciplinary measure and by not informing her of the solutions it was considering for her professional future, particularly since the decision […] extending her contract “as an interim precautionary measure” was hardly likely to reassure her. This breach of the duty of care caused the complainant moral injury, especially as the ITU itself underscores her psychological frailness.
Keywords:
duty of care; moral injury;
Judgment 3127
113th Session, 2012
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"[W]here an internal appeal is lodged within the required time limit but fails to comply with the formal requirements set down in the applicable rules, it is for the organisation, in the exercise of its duty of care, to enable the complainant to correct the appeal by granting him or her a reasonable period of time in which to do so."
Keywords:
breach; correction of complaint; duty of care; duty of discretion; formal flaw; internal appeal; organisation's duties; reasonable time; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 3124
113th Session, 2012
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 3 and 5
Extract:
According to the Tribunal's case law, an organisation cannot unilaterally alter the status of a staff member before giving him or her an opportunity to express a view on the action that it intends to take (see in particular Judgments 1484, under 8, and 1817, under 7 ).
[...]
The Tribunal considers that, although the defendant's assertions may be correct, the fact remains that there is nothing in the file to show that the requirement in the above-mentionned case law has been met. Indeed, there is no evidence that the complainant was expressly informed by the ITU that her appointment was to be terminated for health reasons and that she was thus given the opportunity to state her views on that termination in advance.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1484, 1817
Keywords:
duty of care; duty to inform; right to be heard;
Judgment 3106
113th Session, 2012
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
Any republication of the e-mail at that time amounted to excessive publication and, thus, it is not entitled to the same protection that attached to the original e-mail. This notwithstanding, there is no evidence to suggest that the e-mail on the bulletin board was widely read. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that its presence on the bulletin board was the result of ill will or any intentional act that can be attributed to the Organization. Moreover, it was removed before the complainant sought that course in his request for review of the decision of the Director of PSM/HRM of 15 January 2007. Even so, an organisation has a duty of care to ensure that material that injures the reputation or dignity of its staff members does not find its way into any of its authorised channels of communication. The complainant is entitled to claim against the Organization for its breach of that duty, even though the offending material was removed from the bulletin board before he lodged his internal appeal. In these circumstances, the complainant is entitled to material and moral damages. Given that the evidence does not permit
of a finding that the e-mail was widely read on the bulletin board and, in the absence of evidence of any actual damage to the complainant’s reputation by reason of its presence on the board, the Tribunal assesses those damages at 1,000 euros.
Keywords:
duty of care; freedom of speech;
Judgment 3104
112th Session, 2012
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"[T]he fact that the complainant was not given enough work upon her return from sick leave, which led her to feel marginalised and humiliated, offended her dignity and constitutes an element of the breach of duty of care."
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; refusal to assign work; respect for dignity; sick leave;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; duty of care;
Judgment 3102
112th Session, 2012
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[E]ven if a staff member may claim no right to promotion, promotion procedures must be conducted with due diligence and as swiftly as the normal workings of an administration permit. There is nothing to justify delaying for years a promotion which the staff member may legitimately expect and which naturally has a direct impact on his or her career prospects, unless this delay may be attributed to a fault on the part of the person concerned during the procedure (see Judgment 2706, under 11 and 12)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2706
Keywords:
administrative delay; career; consequence; delay; duty of care; exception; misconduct; official; procedure before the tribunal; promotion; right;
Judgment 3099
112th Session, 2012
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; duty of care;
Consideration 10
Extract:
"[T]he obligation to treat staff members with dignity and the duty of good faith required, at the very least, that there be an accurate record of the interviews, which could have been achieved by, for example, the making of a transcript by a competent stenographer."
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties; recording; respect for dignity;
Judgment 3071
112th Session, 2012
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 48
Extract:
"An international organisation has a responsibility to treat its officials with dignity. If criticism is warranted [...] that should be done either by means of the performance appraisal reports or in a manner that ensures respect for the staff member's dignity."
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; performance report; respect for dignity;
Judgment 3064
112th Session, 2012
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"[I]n its report [...], the Joint Advisory Appeals Board "encourage[d] [the Human Resources Development Department] and the responsible chiefs of the complainant and of her head of section to pursue and step up their efforts to promote better communication and working relations" within the [complainant's unit] and [...] the letter of 18 March 2008 indicated that the Director-General had "endorse[d] this recommendation". The Administration was therefore under an obligation to pursue and step up the efforts in question. However, the evidence on file does not show that the Administration used all the means at the disposal of an organisation such as the ILO to achieve the desired result. The fact that the complainant chose to lodge an appeal in order to seek recognition of her rights did not exempt the Organization from its obligations towards one of its officials to whom it owed a duty of care and who has not been found to have committed any fault."
Keywords:
acceptance; consequence; duty of care; executive head; internal appeals body; misconduct; organisation's duties; purpose; recommendation; report; right; right of appeal; working relations;
Judgment 3055
112th Session, 2012
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"[A]s a general rule, an organisation should refrain from passing on damaging information about a staff member. If the recipient of that information has a legitimate interest in knowing the truth [...] it should refrain from passing on damaging information without first giving the staff member an opportunity to challenge it and give his or her own account."
Keywords:
communication to third party; duty of care; duty of discretion; injury; organisation's duties; professional injury; rebuttal; right to reply; staff member's interest;
Judgment 3041
111th Session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"The Tribunal observes that there can be no justification for the delay and the failure to give the complainant a final decision. The fact that the [internal appeal body's] recommendations left the Administration in a difficult position does not excuse the unreasonable delay or absolve the Director-General from fulfilling her obligation to give a final decision in accordance with the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. The Tribunal finds it particularly egregious that the failure to give a decision also resulted in the complainant not knowing the outcome of the [internal appeal] process. In addition to leaving the complainant in an unfair position in terms of any negotiations or other attempts to resolve the dispute, the complainant was deprived of the opportunity to consider the findings and recommendations contained in the [internal appeal body's] report before filing a complaint with the Tribunal. It appears that [the Organization's] conduct undermined the integrity of the internal appeal process and was a blatant disregard of the complainant's rights."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complainant; delay; duty of care; duty to inform; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; recommendation; right; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 8
Extract:
Abolition of post and termination of appointment following reorganisation / Failure on the part of the Organization to take a final decision on the complainant's appeal / Excessive delay in communicating to the complainant the outcome of the internal appeal procedure.
"The decision to abolish a post must be communicated to the staff person occupying the post in a manner that safeguards that individual's rights. These rights are safeguarded by giving proper notice of the decision, reasons for the decision and an opportunity to contest the decision. As well, subsequent to the decision there must be proper institutional support mechanisms in place to assist the staff member concerned in finding a new assignment."
Keywords:
abolition of post; complainant; decision; duty of care; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; reassignment; right; right of appeal; safeguard; staff member's interest;
Judgment 3038
111th Session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
Failure of the parties to reach agreement on the amount of compensation owed to the complainant for the termination of his appointment following a flawed reassignment procedure.
"The Tribunal finds that the inordinate delay on the part of the Organization, and its conduct during the negotiations, do not reflect the duty that is incumbent on an organisation to negotiate in good faith, or the care it should take in the implementation of a decision. These matters warrant an award of moral damages."
Keywords:
compensation; conduct; delay; duty of care; good faith; moral injury; organisation; organisation's duties; settlement out of court;
Judgment 3034
111th Session, 2011
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 25
Extract:
[T]he duty of care which an international organisation owes to its officials obviously does not imply that the organisation must, as a matter of principle, refrain from adopting rules which are less favourable to its staff than those previously in force, or that it must exempt staff from the normal application of such rules.
Keywords:
duty of care;
Judgment 3026
111th Session, 2011
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
It is well settled that “[a]n organisation may not in good faith end someone’s appointment for poor performance without first warning him and giving him an opportunity to do better” (see Judgment 1583, under 6(a)). Thus, “[a] staff member [...] is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service [and] to have objectives set in advance so that he or she will know the yardstick by which [his or her] future performance will be assessed” (see Judgment 2414, under 23). It is clear that the unsatisfactory aspects of the complainant’s performance were detailed in the mid-point review in his 2006 performance appraisal and detailed in a way that enabled him to know the areas in which he needed to improve his performance.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1583, 2414
Keywords:
duty of care; duty to inform; probationary period; termination of employment;
Judgment 3024
111th Session, 2011
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
According to the Tribunal’s case law cited by the complainant, the principle of good faith and the concomitant duty of care demand that international organisations treat their staff with due consideration in order to avoid causing them undue injury; an employer must consequently inform officials in advance of any action that may imperil their rights or harm their rightful interests (see Judgment 2768, under 4).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2768
Keywords:
duty of care;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
|
