Duty of care (645,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Duty of care
Total judgments found: 137
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Judgment 3005
111th Session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"[A]s the Tribunal observed in Judgment 782, under 1: 'According to the rules of good faith anyone to whom a promise is made may expect it to be kept, and that means that an international official has the right to fulfilment of a promise by the organisation that employs him. The right is conditional. One condition is that the promise should be substantive, i.e. to act, or not to act, or to allow. Others are that it should come from someone who is competent or deemed competent to make it; that breach should cause injury to him 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.'"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 782
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; organisation's duties; promise; right;
Judgment 2997
110th Session, 2011
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
Request for the transfer of pension contributions paid into national insurance schemes.
"The Tribunal considers that EMBL fulfilled its duty of care towards its staff by hosting several information sessions, publishing circulars and other documents, and by offering staff members several opportunities to meet with pension experts in order to inform themselves with regard to their pension rights. It is the responsibility of the staff to avail themselves of any information provided and to seek out clarification as needed for their particular situation."
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; pension; pension entitlements; staff member's duties;
Judgment 2973
110th Session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"By failing to deal with the informal complaints in a manner consistent with its own policy, by failing to conduct an investigation in a timely manner when a formal complaint was filed and then by terminating the investigation, WHO breached its duty of care toward the complainant and caused her serious injury."
Keywords:
breach; claim; duty of care; expert inquiry; harassment; inquiry; investigation; moral injury; organisation's duties; written rule;
Judgment 2924
109th Session, 2010
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"An error of reasoning establishes neither ill will nor a breach of the duty of care, particularly when the actual decision is correct."
Keywords:
breach; duty of care; duty to substantiate decision; mistaken conclusion; organisation's duties;
Judgment 2878
108th Session, 2010
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant asks the Tribunal to quash the decision dismissing his appeal as irreceivable. He submits in particular that Staff Rule 212.02 is not applicable in his case because he was in the process of negotiating a new contract with the Organization and therefore the deadline should have been suspended. He also submits that there was a breach of the principles of good faith, of legitimate expectation, of the duty of care and of respect for dignity.
"[T]here was no reason why the complainant could not submit his request for review within the 60-day time limit provided for in Staff Rule 212.02, and withdraw it later if necessary. The Joint Appeals Board was correct in recommending that his appeal be dismissed as time-barred. So far as concerns the applicable time limits, there was no breach of the principles of good faith, legitimate expectation, respect for dignity, or duty of care. The complainant refers to Judgment 2584 [...]. However, [...] in the present case there was only one official communication from the Organization to the complainant between the date of the letter notifying him of the decision not to further extend his contract [...] and the date of his letter requesting the Director-General to review that decision [...]. This cannot be construed, as claimed by the complainant, as an initiation of settlement negotiations which could have suspended the time limit for submission of a request to review the decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2584, 2841
Keywords:
breach; delay; duty of care; good faith; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; proposal; respect for dignity; settlement out of court; staff regulations and rules; time limit;
Judgment 2768
106th Session, 2009
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
"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 employees in advance of any action that may imperil their rights or harm their rightful interests (see Judgment 2116, under 5). This duty of care is greater in a rather opaque or particularly complex legal situation. [...] When the complainant took up employment with the Office it had been possible, for at least a year, to obtain the transfer of pension rights from the USS to the Office's pension scheme. But it is clear from the file that the applicable rules were so complex that a mere perusal of the documentation would not enable employees to understand them fully. Furthermore, the Administration and staff members were still largely unfamiliar with the possibility of transferring pension rights. In the light of these particular circumstances, the Office's duty to inform could not be confined to merely handing the applicable texts to the staff members concerned by a possible transfer. This duty demanded that the Office, having obtained such information as was necessary, should draw to the attention of the staff members concerned the possibility of obtaining a transfer of pension rights and should inform them of the procedure to be followed."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2116
Keywords:
duty of care; duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; participation; pension; pension entitlements; respect for dignity; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; transfer of pension rights;
Judgment 2720
105th Session, 2008
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
As the Tribunal has consistently held, for instance in Judgments 396, 1875, 2371 and 2475, international organisations are bound to refrain from any type of conduct that may harm the dignity or reputation of their staff members. This duty, which flows from the general principles governing the international civil service, is also applicable as a matter of course to former staff members of an organisation.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 396, 1875, 2371, 2475
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; respect for dignity;
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 2345
97th Session, 2004
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1(c)
Extract:
"[A]n organisation, as part of its duty of care for its staff, is expected to help any staff member who is mistaken in the exercise of a right, if such help will enable the staff member to take useful action. If it is not too late, the organisation should also provide the staff member with procedural guidance.
In this case, [...] the Organization should have realised that the complainant was mistaken and that he did not need to wait for an authorisation before filing a complaint with the Tribunal. It had enough time to point out to him that his complaint against the Director-General's decision [...] should be filed directly with the Tribunal within ninety days after the notification of the decision.
As the complainant was not given that guidance, he failed to act in time and the complaint should be declared irreceivable. Such a ruling would not, however, be compatible with the requirements of good faith which the parties and the Tribunal must observe."
Keywords:
complaint; date of notification; direct appeal to tribunal; duty of care; duty to inform; good faith; internal appeal; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; staff member's duties; time bar; time limit; tribunal;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"In view of its duty of care towards its staff, an organisation must spare them the material and psychological drawbacks of endless procedures [...]: while an organisation cannot avoid an occasional overload of work, it must take appropriate measures to avert the drawbacks of a massive and foreseeable increase in legal disputes."
Keywords:
delay; duty of care; material injury; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 2258
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Communications from an organisation to a staff member must be interpreted according to the meaning that their addressee can reasonably ascribe to them. Since it owes a duty of care to its employees, an administration which intends to take a compulsory decision binding the person concerned must express its decision clearly so as to remove from its action any potentially harmful ambiguity."
Keywords:
binding character; decision; duty of care; effect; injury; interpretation; organisation's duties;
Judgment 2158
93rd Session, 2002
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
[T]he complainant pleads a "material error". The gist of his argument is that the Tribunal failed to admit the existence of promises by the Agency concerning the renewal of his appointment.
The Tribunal noted in Judgment 2034, under 15, 16 and 17, that the complainant cited specific promises to that effect. He relied among other things on a statement of 22 July 1998 by the former Director of the Institute of Air Navigation Services in Luxembourg. The Tribunal found that, even if there had been promises made, the complainant had failed to prove that they had been taken by the competent authority, since it is the Director General who has sole responsibility for employment policy of Eurocontrol. The Tribunal further observed that the complainant had failed to prove that he was to be given a permanent appointment or that the competent authority had assured him at some stage that his appointment would be renewed and subsequently converted into a permanent one.
The conclusion is that the Tribunal did examine the evidence and made an appraisal of it which may not be challenged in an application for review. The plea is therefore inadmissible.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2034
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith;
Judgment 2112
92nd Session, 2002
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7(c)
Extract:
Subject to the conditions laid down in the case law, an organisation can, even where there is no decision, be bound by a promise or assurances given to a staff member.
In this case, the fact that the complainant was given a copy of the memorandum of 9 June 1999 clearly did not imply a promise that the formalities would culminate in a decision. There were still uncertainties, particularly regarding the 2000-2001 biennium: there might well be a new Director-General, the budget had not yet been adopted, and a post had to be identified.
In his further brief the complainant tries to prove that the words "foreseen for Mr [...]" were written opposite a specific post in a budget document, or a copy of it kept by the Administration, which the complainant came across by chance. The Organization denies, and the complainant fails to prove, that that was so. In any event, it is immaterial for the reasons stated above. Being for internal administrative purposes only, the document would not constitute evidence of either a firm commitment or a promise by the Organization to appoint the complainant.
The complainant has produced no other evidence from which the existence of a promise to appoint him can be
inferred (even if both he and the former Director-General wanted him to be appointed).
Consequently, he may rely neither on the existence of a contract for a period of two years nor a promise that such a
contract would be concluded.
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; promise;
Judgment 2063
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The authority of the insurance brokers goes beyond a simple right to make an administrative check of the claims it receives [...]. [Insurers] have the right to check whether, under the insurance contract, they are liable for the costs of the care dispensed. But they must so exercise that authority as to provide the insured with a guarantee that their claims to coverage are examined with all due care."
Keywords:
condition; contract; discretion; duty of care; health insurance; insurance; medical expenses; refund; request by a party; safeguard;
Judgment 1756
85th Session, 1998
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10(a)
Extract:
[A]n organisation, bound as it is, like its own employees, to show good faith, must avoid causing them undue injury. Precedents which declare the duty of care and consideration over its staff are to be found in, for example, Judgments 361, [...] under 9; 367, [...] under 4; 396, [...] under 6; 435, [...] under 5; 447, [...] under 4; 873, [...] under 5 and 7; and 942, [...] under 4.
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;
Judgment 1594
82nd Session, 1997
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The description and grading of the complainant's post dragged on for three-and-a-half years, and that was too long. As the Appeal Board held, "the administration has a duty to process promptly any claim to upgrading or to payment of special post allowance so that the official will not be left to suffer or to wonder what is going on.
Keywords:
administrative delay; duty of care; good faith; organisation's duties; post classification; post description; request by a party; special post allowance; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1278
75th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"In Judgment 782 [...] the Tribunal stated the circumstances in which it would enforce a promise by an international organisation to a staff member. The promise must be substantive, i.e. to act, or not to act, or to allow; it must come from someone who is competent or deemed competent to make it; the breach of it must cause injury to the person who relies on it; and the position in law must not have altered between the date of the promise and the date at which fulfilment is due. It does not matter what form the promise takes: it may be written or oral, express or implied."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 782
Keywords:
case law; competence; condition; decision-maker; duty of care; good faith; organisation's duties; promise;
Judgment 404
43rd Session, 1980
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The complainant maintains that the organisation was remiss in facilitating her transfer to some other international organisation. Her plea can succeed only if the organisation was under a duty to find for her or help her to find other employment. It was not".
Keywords:
duty of care; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; transfer;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
|
