Delay in internal procedure (696,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Delay in internal procedure
Total judgments found: 90
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
Judgment 4310
130th Session, 2020
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to apply the sanction of summary dismissal to him.
Consideration 15
Extract:
It is well settled in the case law that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organisation owes to its staff members (see Judgments 3160, under 16, 3582, under 3, and 4100, under 7). The JAAB and the Organization acknowledge the delay in considering the internal appeal, which took more than 18 months. Such a duration is excessive.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 3582, 4100
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure;
Judgment 4284
130th Session, 2020
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant asks the Tribunal to find that UNESCO has failed to execute Judgment 3936 and to order the Organization to review her case.
Consideration 8
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls its case law according to which “[a]n organisation may not justify its delay in handling a file by pleading reasons linked to the difficulties facing its Administration. It is up to the organisation to overcome a shortage of human or financial resources, so that no staff member who is waiting for a decision suffers undue delay, which constitutes a denial of a staff member’s right to have his or her requests handled with due diligence” (see, in particular, Judgments 2196, under 9, 2522, under 7, and 2768, under 6(a)).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2196, 2522, 2768
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure;
Judgment 4239
129th Session, 2020
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment for health reasons and claims that the compensation she received for her service-incurred injury is grossly inadequate.
Consideration 33
Extract:
The time taken for the internal appeal was clearly lengthy. But having regard to the potentially complex factual and legal issues raised, the gravity of the subject matter and the fairly detailed consideration of the appeals undertaken by the HBA as revealed by its report, the time taken was not so long as to warrant the award of additional moral damages.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4231
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term appointment and to place him on special leave with pay until his contract expired.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant submits that he is entitled to compensation for the inordinate delay (over three years) in the process, from the submission of his appeal to the Director-General on 29 September 2014 to the issuing of the impugned decision on 12 March 2018. The Tribunal accepts that the delay in the internal appeal process was excessive. However, the request for moral damages will be rejected as the complainant has not articulated the adverse effects of the delay.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4229
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former staff member of the World Food Programme, challenges the decision to maintain the decision not to renew his contract, and to award him material and moral damages instead of reinstatement.
Considerations 5-7
Extract:
The complainant claims moral damages for excessive delay. It is well settled in the case law that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organization owes to its staff members. It is also settled that the amount of compensation for unreasonable delay will ordinarily be influenced by at least two considerations. One is the length of the delay and the other is the effect of the delay. These considerations are interrelated as lengthy delay may have a greater effect. The effect of the delay will usually depend on, amongst other things, the subject matter of the appeal (see, for example, Judgment 4100, consideration 7).
[...] The relevant period of delay in the internal appeal proceedings was about three years and eight months. This was too long. It was not in keeping with the Organization’s duty of care to the complainant, which required it to ensure that the internal appeal was conducted with due diligence.
Regarding the impact of that delay, the complainant states that it caused him injury that was even more serious because he was unfairly separated from WFP in June 2013 when the appeal proceedings were ongoing, although he had requested that his appointment be extended until those proceedings were finalized. He states that he has “been mistreated, discriminated [against] and denied [...] opportunities to join other UN Organizations” until the final decision was given.The FAO submits that the complainant is mistaken because Manual paragraph 331.3.25 states that the filing of an appeal does not have the effect of suspending the implementation of an administrative decision which is the subject of the appeal. While the Tribunal finds no ground on which to hold that the complainant was discriminated against on account of the delay, the FAO’s submission does not mean that the length of the delay in the internal appeal proceedings did not cause him injury, albeit that he might not have stated it forensically or with precision. He was obviously anxious over his employment situation but did not pursue other employment options as diligently as he might have done with the hope that he may have been reinstated. The Tribunal holds that this consideration in light of the length of the delay entitles the complainant to moral damages, for which he will be awarded 5,000 euros.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4100
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4228
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reject his request for compensation for loss of earnings allegedly caused by a service-incurred injury.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The claim regarding excessive delay in the internal proceedings leading to the final decision of 3 November 2017 is unfounded. The Tribunal finds that the duration of the proceedings cannot be considered egregious, given that the complainant’s request for reimbursement of medical expenses was approved immediately and that the procedure regarding his request for compensation for loss of earnings included many steps prior to the internal appeal before the Appeals Committee. The Tribunal further notes that there was no urgency to the question regarding loss of earnings that could not be remedied through a retroactive payment if necessary, and that the complainant has not provided convincing evidence of an injury stemming from the length of the procedure.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4227
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant seeks moral damages by reference to the time taken for the investigation process (over one and a half years) as well as the time taken to finalise the internal appeal process (over two and a half years). It may be accepted that both periods were extremely lengthy. However, the explicit basis for the damages is said to be “the enormous distress suffered by the complainant”. This is but an assertion not founded on any evidence of a causal connection and it is more likely that any distress suffered by the complainant over this time arose not because of the length of time the steps took but rather from the fact that the defendant organization was consistently satisfied at several levels of decision-making and review that the decision to dismiss the complainant for serious misconduct was justified.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; injury; inquiry; investigation; moral injury;
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant argues in his brief that “the duration of the investigation process went far beyond a reasonable time to guarantee due process”. In its reply the defendant organization makes the point that the complainant does not specify how the duration of the investigation allegedly impacted upon his due process rights. The complainant does not, in his rejoinder, provide those particulars. It is by no means obvious that the time taken, which was lengthy, affected the complainant’s capacity to defend the charges or otherwise prejudiced his position. This contention should be rejected.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; due process; injury; inquiry; investigation;
Judgment 4222
129th Session, 2020
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal of UNESCO to award full compensation for the injury suffered as a result of an accident recognized as being service-incurred.
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainant further alleges specific moral injury resulting from the excessive length of the internal appeals procedure. It is true that this procedure, which spanned some seven years for reasons mostly attributable to the Organization, was unreasonably long. The Tribunal considers, however, that this excessively long period did not in itself cause serious injury to the complainant.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4215
129th Session, 2020
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to confirm his appointment at the end of his probation period.
Consideration 24
Extract:
[T]he period of some 11 months which it took to handle this appeal is not inherently unreasonable and, insofar as the complainant was not in a precarious position from the point of view of employment during this period, this time frame did not cause him substantial injury.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4178
128th Session, 2019
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to grant him a promotion in the 2014 professional promotion exercise.
Consideration 15
Extract:
It is well settled in the case law that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organisation owes to its staff members (see, for example, Judgments 3160, consideration 16, 3582, consideration 3, and 3688, consideration 11). In Judgment 3160, consideration 17, the Tribunal also observed that “[t]he amount of compensation for unreasonable delay will ordinarily be influenced by at least two considerations” namely, the length of the delay and the effect of the delay. The complainant submits that he has suffered pain and distress, including as a result of the delay in the internal grievance procedures. It is observed that the FAO did not make a submission in relation to the delay in the appeal process. Accordingly, the complainant is entitled to moral damages [...].
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 3582, 3688
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury; patere legem;
Judgment 4162
128th Session, 2019
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the final decision on her claim for compensation for a service-incurred injury or illness.
Consideration 29
Extract:
In Judgment 4098, under consideration 10, in relation to delay in the internal appeal process, the Tribunal stated:
“It is well settled in the case law that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organization owes to its staff members (see Judgment 3160, under 16; see also Judgments 3582, under 3, and 3688, under 11).”
In Judgment 3160, in consideration 17, the Tribunal also stated:
“The amount of compensation for unreasonable delay will ordinarily be influenced by at least two considerations. One is the length of the delay and the other is the effect of the delay. These considerations are interrelated as lengthy delay may have a greater effect. That latter consideration, the effect of the delay, will usually depend on, amongst other things, the subject matter of the appeal. Delay in an internal appeal concerning a matter of limited seriousness in its impact on the appellant would be likely to be less injurious to the appellant than delay in an appeal concerning an issue of fundamental importance and seriousness in its impact on the appellant.”
See also Judgment 4031, under 8.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 3582, 3688, 4031, 4098
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure;
Judgment 4147
128th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to retain his candidature for a post.
Consideration 13
Extract:
The consistent case law of the Tribunal has it that the amount of compensation for unreasonable delay will ordinarily be influenced by the interrelated considerations of the length of the delay and the effect of the delay (see Judgments 3160, under 17, 3582, under 4, 3688, under 12, and 3879, under 5). In the present case, the complainant has not articulated what impact the delay has had on him. Accordingly, no award of moral damages will be made.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 3582, 3688, 3879
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury; patere legem;
Judgment 4111
127th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former official of the ILO, alleges that he was subjected to harassment and that the investigation into his allegations of harassment was flawed.
Consideration 10
Extract:
As to the proceedings before the JAAB, they were also seriously delayed. Whereas the grievance was filed on 21 August 2014, the JAAB’s report was issued on 1 April 2016. Both the JAAB and the ILO have admitted this delay, which the Director-General agreed, in the impugned decision, to compensate in the amount of 2,500 Swiss francs.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4110
127th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former official of the ILO, alleges that he was subjected to harassment and that the investigation into his allegations of harassment was flawed.
Consideration 10
Extract:
As to the proceedings before the JAAB, they were also seriously delayed. Whereas the grievance was filed on 1 September 2014, the JAAB’s report was issued on 1 April 2016. Both the JAAB and the ILO have admitted this delay, which the Director-General agreed, in the impugned decision, to compensate in the amount of 2,500 Swiss francs.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Consideration 9
Extract:
Although it must be taken into account that the complainant took a month to provide his comments and that HRD asked the investigator to respond to them, which may have taken some time, the Tribunal considers that, in view of the circumstances of the case, a period of nine months between the submission of the findings of the investigation and the notification of the decision of HRD is excessive. Harassment cases should be treated as quickly and efficiently as possible, in order to protect staff members from unnecessary suffering, but attention must also be paid to thoroughness and procedure (see Judgment 3447, consideration 7).
The moral injury thus caused to the complainant will be fairly redressed by awarding him compensation in the amount of 1,000 Swiss francs.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3447
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; harassment; inquiry; investigation; moral injury;
Judgment 4109
127th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former official of the ILO, alleges that she was subjected to harassment and that the investigation into her allegations of harassment was flawed.
Consideration 10
Extract:
As to the proceedings before the JAAB, they were also seriously delayed. Whereas the grievance was filed on 21 August 2014, the JAAB’s report was issued on 1 April 2016. Both the JAAB and the ILO have admitted this delay, which the Director-General agreed, in the impugned decision, to compensate in the amount of 2,500 Swiss francs.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4108
127th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former official of the ILO, alleges that she was subjected to harassment and that the investigation into her allegations of harassment was flawed.
Consideration 10
Extract:
As to the proceedings before the JAAB, they were also seriously delayed. Whereas the grievance was filed on 21 August 2014, the JAAB’s report was issued on 1 April 2016. Both the JAAB and the ILO have admitted this delay, which the Director-General agreed, in the impugned decision, to compensate in the amount of 2,500 Swiss francs.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; moral injury;
Judgment 4102
127th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the ILO’s failure to take a final decision on her job grading appeal and the failure to grant her a contract without limit of time.
Consideration 7
Extract:
In awarding moral damages, the Tribunal takes into consideration that the Administration, in its letter of 6 March 2017, recognized its egregious administrative oversights and therefore decided to pay the complainant immediately 20,000 Swiss francs, and that the Director-General offered his sincere apologies.
Taking into account that the complainant requested in 2009 that her job be graded at the G.4 level, that on 10 May 2017 a final decision had not yet been taken, that there was a failure to exercise a duty of care on the part of the Administration, which has failed to act for a long time, and that the issue was of great importance for the complainant, the Tribunal decides to award her 16,000 Swiss francs in moral damages in addition to the 20,000 Swiss francs already paid by the Organization.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; duty of care; moral injury;
Judgment 4100
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select him for a position for which he had applied.
Consideration 7
Extract:
It is well settled in the case law that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organization owes to its staff members (see Judgments 3160, under 16, and 3582, under 3). Although it appears that the Administration took some steps to deal with an unusually large volume of work, the time taken to finalize the HBA report was nonetheless unreasonable. In Judgment 3160, under 17, the Tribunal held:
“The amount of compensation for unreasonable delay will ordinarily be influenced by at least two considerations. One is the length of the delay and the other is the effect of the delay. These considerations are interrelated as lengthy delay may have a greater effect. That latter consideration, the effect of the delay, will usually depend on, amongst other things, the subject matter of the appeal. Delay in an internal appeal concerning a matter of limited seriousness in its impact on the appellant would be likely to be less injurious to the appellant than delay in an appeal concerning an issue of fundamental importance and seriousness in its impact on the appellant.”
(See also Judgment 4031, under 8.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 3582, 4031
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; duty of care; moral injury;
Judgment 4098
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select him for a position for which he had applied.
Consideration 10
Extract:
It is well settled in the case law that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organization owes to its staff members (see Judgment 3160, under 16; see also Judgments 3582, under 3, and 3688, under 11). In the present case, there was unreasonable delay in the appeal process[.]
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 3582, 3688
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; duty of care; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4074
127th Session, 2019
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to review or amend the separation agreement offered to him and to terminate his appointment without the appropriate financial package.
Consideration 17
Extract:
The complainant seeks moral damages for the delay in the internal consideration of his grievance. The Global Fund argues this claim is irreceivable. Routinely and necessarily such a claim can only first be made in the Tribunal. The claim is receivable. The Global Fund contends the internal appeal process took 11 months, which was reasonable. The complainant draws attention to the fact that there was a period of nearly 18 months between the public delivery of the Tribunal’s judgment and the final decision of the Executive Director. Even taking that longer period, significant periods of time can be attributed to the conduct of the complainant or his counsel, particularly the time taken to respond to a Global Fund proposal concerning informal discussions to resolve the matter in the first half of 2015. The internal appeal took approximately 11 months. This is a lengthy period but, in all the circumstances including the factual and legal complexity of the proceedings, it was not unreasonable. The claim for moral damages for excessive delay is rejected.
Keywords:
delay in internal procedure; internal procedure; new claim; receivability of the complaint;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
|
