Investigation (860, 784, 898, 902, 903, 904, 906, 907, 913,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Investigation
Total judgments found: 180
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 2601
102nd Session, 2007
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The Tribunal does not consider that in this case the requirements of due process were disregarded. The complainant was informed of the statements taken immediately after the incident and those gathered subsequently, and indeed of the observations made by the Chief of the Conferences Department, and he had several opportunities to express his own views and to comment on the documents submitted to the Joint Advisory Committee. There was no written rule or principle which obliged the Administration to take down those statements in the presence of the complainant, given that they were not used without his knowledge, or to hold a face-to-face meeting or a reconstitution on the spot of this regrettable incident."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 999, 1133
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; advisory body; inquiry; investigation; right to reply; testimony;
Judgment 2552
101st Session, 2006
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
An accusation of harassment "requires that an international organisation both investigate the matter thoroughly and accord full due process and protection to the person accused."
Keywords:
due process; harassment; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; safeguard;
Judgment 2475
99th Session, 2005
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
The complainant was dismissed on the grounds of misconduct following an investigation. "The procedure adopted in this case was clearly flawed in that the complainant was denied the opportunity to question any of the persons whose statements were used against him, evidence of little probative value was relied upon and, at least to some extent, he was required to prove his innocence instead of having the matters alleged proven against him. [...] It follows that the [...] decision [...] to dismiss the complainant must be set aside. The complainant shall be reinstated [...] and shall receive all arrears of salaries and other benefits; he must account for any earnings from other employment."
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; breach; burden of proof; consequence; disciplinary measure; evidence; inquiry; investigation; lack of evidence; procedural flaw; reinstatement; serious misconduct; staff member's duties; termination of employment; testimony;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[T]he obligations of an employer to act in good faith and to respect the dignity of its employees determine what is permissible. In particular, these considerations require that an investigation be conducted in a manner designed to ascertain all relevant facts without compromising the good name of the employee and that the employee be given an opportunity to test the evidence put against him or her and to answer the charge made."
Keywords:
appraisal of evidence; condition; good faith; inquiry; investigation; official; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; right to reply;
Judgment 2365
97th Session, 2004
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5(e)
Extract:
[The complainant] has misunderstood the internal nature of the investigative report. Since the latter was requested and produced as part of an internal audit, it cannot on its own serve as conclusive evidence against a staff member. On the other hand, it may yield indications of irregularities justifying the initiation of a disciplinary procedure, in the course of which the person charged must be allowed all admissible means of defence. The Director-General did not abuse his discretionary authority by considering that the investigative report contained indications which merited further scrutiny in the context of a disciplinary procedure, even on the assumption that he had been unable to study the report in full himself.
Keywords:
disciplinary charges; inquiry; investigation; investigation report;
Judgment 2364
97th Session, 2004
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
On 10 March 2002 the complainant was informed that an administrative investigation concerning him was to be conducted, which might lead to a disciplinary procedure. The purpose of such an investigation, which may be compared – in terms of criminal justice – to the investigation that precedes possible criminal proceedings, is not to gather evidence which can be used against the person concerned, but to provide the competent authority with enough information to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to initiate a disciplinary procedure. Since the latter must by definition be adversarial, the organisation cannot make use of evidence against the person concerned unless it has been gathered in compliance with proper adversarial procedure, as required by consistent case law, and the individual concerned may contest any measure not complying with that requirement.
Keywords:
inquiry; investigation;
Judgment 2351
97th Session, 2004
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7(c) and 8(a)
Extract:
When he was recruited the complainant provided a copy of a diploma but its authenticity was questioned a few years later. The matter was queried with the educational establishment and the Secretary-General then issued the complainant a written censure. The Tribunal considers that "there was not sufficient proof either that the diploma was not issued to the complainant [...] or that the latter had been informed that, according to the [educational establishment], he was not entitled to receive it. The Secretary-General might have enquired further into the aspects which remained uncertain, but did not do so. The 'likelihood' referred to by the Secretary-General, if it is not incontrovertibly ascertained, cannot make up for the lack of conclusive evidence. Based as it is on an arbitrary appraisal of the facts, the impugned decision as far as it concerns the disciplinary sanction must therefore be set aside. Although it did not give rise to a written decision, the non-renewal of the short-term contract was based on charges levelled against the complainant in the course of the disciplinary procedure. The mere cancellation of the disciplinary sanction must entail that of the decision of non-renewal."
Keywords:
bias; consequence; contract; decision; decision quashed; degree; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; executive head; grounds; implied decision; inquiry; investigation; lack of evidence; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; right; short-term; terms of appointment; warning;
Judgment 2261
95th Session, 2003
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
There is no substance to the allegation of failure of due process. In particular, the mission report which gave the Organization information on which to base the decision to charge him, was a preliminary investigative tool and the complainant had no right to review its contents prior to the decision being made that the disciplinary procedure should be started. Once that procedure was under way, the complainant was given ample communication of the case against him and was afforded full opportunity to answer and make his defence. It was no breach of the principle of good faith for the Organization to ask the complainant for a statement of his activities and subsequently to use such statement, which was entirely exculpatory, as evidence of his deliberate attempt to mislead the investigation, which it manifestly was.
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; disciplinary charges; due process in disciplinary procedure; inquiry; investigation; investigation report;
Judgment 2229
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3(b)
Extract:
"In accordance with the principles relating to the protection of information, staff members are entitled, even outside the context of a dispute, to have access to significant information concerning them which is in the possession of the administration [...] This applies a fortiori in the context of a procedure in which such information is used to support a decision affecting a staff member. There are, however, special cases in which higher dictates preclude its disclosure (on this issue, see Judgment 1756, under 10(b)). A provision [...] which stipulates that the reports of joint disciplinary committees or other boards of enquiry are confidential, cannot be construed as preventing the disclosure of such reports to a staff member adversely affected by a measure taken against him. otherwise, the higher principle of the right to be heard would be violated."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1756
Keywords:
confidential evidence; inquiry; investigation; investigation report; right to reply;
Judgment 2190
94th Session, 2003
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The complainant's claim that the Tribunal should order the organization to undertake disciplinary investigations into the actions of [...] the staff member who allegedly entered a 'frivolous and dilatory' plea of irreceivability before the [Headquarters] Board [of Appeal], clearly cannot be allowed by the Tribunal, which has no jurisdiction to issue injunctions against international organisations, let alone to cast judgment on the means of defence used on behalf of such organisations in the context of internal appeal proceedings or litigation."
Keywords:
claim; competence of tribunal; disciplinary procedure; inquiry; internal appeal; internal appeals body; investigation; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply; right to reply;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is incomprehensible that no internal administrative investigation was conducted following an accident which involved a [...] vehicle [of the organization] driven by an employee of the organization in the context of an official mission, and which caused the death of two passengers, one of whom was a [...] staff member [of the organization], as well as the serious injuries suffered by the complainant. The fact that the Namibian authorities opened their own enquiry could not in any way exempt the organization from ascertaining whether the condition of the vehicle, the preparation of the mission and, more generally, the circumstances of the accident revealed any administrative failure, the consequences of which it would have a duty to bear. [...] There is no evidence to suggest that any internal enquiry whatsoever was conducted in connection with this accident. This failure caused the complainant an injury which the Tribunal considers to be equitably compensated by an award of 5,000 United States dollars."
Keywords:
injury; inquiry; investigation; material damages; member state; misconduct; moral injury; omission; organisation's duties; professional accident; service-incurred;
Judgment 1977
89th Session, 2000
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"[The complainant] argues that because the Tribunal found in Judgment 1763 that the Director of the Division of Personnel should not have both collected evidence at the investigation stage and sat as chairman of the Joint Disciplinary Board at the deliberative stage, the consequence must be that any evidence collected in that flawed process must be forever tainted [...] The complainant is wrong. Judgment 1763 did not find that the investigation process was itself flawed but made it clear that the manner in which it had been carried out in part by a person who was also Chairman of the Joint Disciplinary Board vitiated the latter's deliberative functions. The evidence itself remained both admissible and relevant and as long as both the [Office of Internal Audit and Evaluation Support] and the ad hoc panel offered the complainant full opportunity to comment on and respond to it, which they did, the complainant has no legitimate grounds for objecting thereto."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1763
Keywords:
admissibility of evidence; appraisal of evidence; conflict of interest; disciplinary procedure; evidence; evidence during investigation; inquiry; investigation; procedural rights during investigation; right to be heard;
Judgment 1899
88th Session, 2000
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Disciplinary relations between an organisation and a staff member do not directly concern other members of staff or affect their position in law. Consequently, a decision regarding a disciplinary inquiry or a disciplinary measure relating to one staff member will not adversely affect other staff, so the latter will have no cause of action for challenging a disciplinary sanction or a refusal to impose one."
Keywords:
cause of action; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; inquiry; investigation; official; other; refusal; request to subject someone to disciplinary proceedings;
Judgment 1796
86th Session, 1999
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The statements by the representative [of the organization] and by the complainant are at odds and there is no irrefutable evidence before the Tribunal. The conclusion is that what was needed was a proper inquiry to see whether on the strength of reliable evidence the charges against him stood up.
Keywords:
appraisal of evidence; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; due process; evidence; inquiry; investigation; judicial review; misconduct;
Judgment 1764
85th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainant is accused of having cheated the Organisation by falsifying airline tickets intended for official travel. "[The complainant's] behaviour cannot be seen as anything but fraud to his employer's cost and warranting severe punishment. And his shifty attempts to cover up his misconduct and mislead the Agency in the enquiry made his offence a great deal worse."
Keywords:
conduct; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; duty of loyalty; honesty; inquiry; investigation; misconduct; serious misconduct; staff member's duties;
Judgment 1763
85th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15 and 17
Extract:
The complainant is accused of having cheated the Organisation by falsifying airline tickets intended for official travel. "[T]he Director of the Division of Personnel [...] was both the chairman of the Disciplinary Board and the head of the department conducting the initial investigation. That the Director of the Division of Personnel should be chairman of the Board is required by paragraph 13(a) of section 13, Part II, of the Agency's Administrative Manual and does not constitute a procedural flaw, but does give rise to a situation in which there is a grave danger of an actual breach of procedural fairness. That is what in fact occurred. As the chairman of the Disciplinary Board, the Director had to refrain from personal involvement in the investigation. He must not be both judge and policeman. That, however, is what happened on at least one occasion. [...] This constitutes a serious breach of due process. [...] As chairman of the Joint Disciplinary Board, the Director of the Division of Personnel had a duty to be and to appear to be impartial."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PARAGRAPH 13(A) OF SECTION 13, PART II, OF IAEA'S ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL
Keywords:
bias; conflict of interest; disciplinary body; disciplinary procedure; due process; inquiry; investigation; investigative body; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1675
84th Session, 1998
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"[The Organisation] pleads that the hearing of witnesses by the Disciplinary Board need not be adversarial and that the inquiry will be if the Board hears witnesses called by both sides. the plea is mistaken. An inquiry will be adversarial only if the parties attend, or have at least been duly invited to attend, the hearing of witnesses."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: RULE NO. 12 OF THE EUROCONTROL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; disciplinary procedure; inquiry; investigation; procedural flaw; right to reply; testimony;
Judgment 1641
83rd Session, 1997
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7(a)
Extract:
The Flemming principle "demands that, so far as can be, pay in the international civil service should stay on a par with the best pay on the local market. Since for the time being there is neither a continuing survey nor a new one interim adjustment answers the purpose of Flemming. Yet [...] it is not at odds with that purpose to make the adjustment for the last period retroactive in the light of the findings of the general survey. During that period, which is short, the idea of interim adjustment is not discarded but the grant of it simply made subject to other conditions."
Keywords:
adjustment; condition; flemming principle; general service category; inquiry; investigation; period; purpose; salary; scale;
Consideration 2
Extract:
The case concerns the "general methodology" which provides the procedure for the salary surveys done under the auspices of the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) and which permits adjustments in pay. The ICSC and the United Nations were granted leave to intervene, but the complainants object to the intervention by the UN. "Under Article 13, paragraph 3, of the Rules of the Tribunal the President may allow submissions from a third party." The Tribunal holds that it was appropriate to allow the United Nations to comment, "the aim being to make for uniform application of the rules to the organisations of the United Nations 'common system'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 13(3) OF THE RULES
Keywords:
adjustment; coordinated organisations; enforcement; icsc decision; iloat statute; inquiry; investigation; organisation; president of the tribunal; rule of another organisation; salary; scale; submissions;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainants are challenging the methodology laid down for carrying out salary surveys and a decision by WIPO reflected in their pay slips to apply that method. The Tribunal holds that they have a cause of action, which is is to obtain from the Tribunal "a declaration that the rule and the decision they are challenging would still be unlawful even if they had later got the increase that was withheld for the six months prior to the general survey. They would indeed have been slightly better off had they received the increase earlier. They are also entitled to a decision as to whether the rule they are challenging holds good for the future."
Keywords:
adjustment; cause of action; decision; decision quashed; increase; increment withheld; inquiry; investigation; payslip; receivability of the complaint; salary; scale;
Judgment 1619
83rd Session, 1997
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"When a staff member makes charges as serious as sexual harassment an organisation must do its utmost to afford protection. But it must at the same time carry out a full and proper inquiry that respects the rights of the accused. Here the WHO obviously failed to do so. Instead it originally preferred to let the Tribunal rule without adducing evidence that might have proved material. It thereby erred, and the complainant is entitled to redress on that account."
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; inquiry; investigation; moral injury; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; right to reply; sexual harassment;
Judgment 1519
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"The complainants argue that the [salary] survey ought to have compared jobs at like levels of seniority inside and outside [the organization] and not ignored the inverted 'pyramid' of the age structure of [the organization's] staff. There is merit to the criticism. Yet to whichever side one may tend on that point, the comparison is fated to go awry. In any event there was nothing unlawful in the approach the survey took. Neither [the ICSC] nor [the] organization went beyond the bounds of the discretion that the case law allow".
Keywords:
case law; discretion; flemming principle; general service category; icsc decision; inquiry; investigation; salary; seniority; step; terms of appointment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The complainants' plea that the [ICSC's] method of comparison with outside pay [as modified in 1992] should not have disregarded training would carry weight if it had any merit [...] but it is hard to evaluate the benefits of it to staff. Any attempt to do so may end in approximation or error because those benefits are not a reward for services rendered and depend on each staff member's duties, experience and career prospects. Though comparison of such benefits might have proved possible, the [ICSC's] methodology did not have to take account of them."
Keywords:
discretion; flemming principle; general service category; icsc decision; inquiry; investigation; salary; terms of appointment;
Consideration 12
Extract:
The International Civil Service Commission was not "bound to recommend that [the organization] fall in line with the practice of outside employers [...] In respect of compulsory insurance premiums and the refund of expenses incurred [the organization's] scheme of staff health insurance and the [national] social security system [...] are not closely comparable; indeed they are quite different. [...] The Commission abided by the applicable methodology - for all its flaws on that count - and [the organization] made no mistake of fact or of law."
Keywords:
contributions; flemming principle; general service category; health insurance; icsc decision; inquiry; insurance; investigation; salary; social benefits; terms of appointment;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The revision of 1992 [of the general methodology which the International Civil Service Commission applies to salary service] did result in a reduction of outside employees' fringe benefits. [...] According to the survey [...] the goods and services taken into account were such that the effect of the change was slight. So the revision is not to be deemed unlawful on that score, the Commission exercised its discretion".
Keywords:
discretion; flemming principle; fringe benefits; general service category; icsc decision; inquiry; investigation; reckoning; salary; scale;
Judgment 1496
80th Session, 1996
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The Tribunal would allow a complaint against a decision to transfer an official "if it were a hidden disciplinary sanction because there are specific procedural rules to protect a staff member when disciplinary action is taken: see for example Judgments 126, under 4 and 9, 1078, under 16, and 1407, under 18. In processing, ordering and notifying transfer an organisation must heed the staff member's dignity and good name and not cause unnecessary hardship: see Judgments 367, under 13 and 14, 631, under 27 and 28, 942, under 4, and 1234, under 15 and 19. And the decision must follow a proper enquiry: see Judgment 942, under 4."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 126, 367, 631, 942, 1078, 1234, 1407
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; due process; hidden disciplinary measure; inquiry; investigation; misuse of authority; moral injury; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's interest; transfer;
Judgment 1384
78th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant was accused of removing computer equipment from the work place. The organization accordingly decided not to renew his fixed-term appointment. After carrying out an inquiry, the regional director submitted a first report which "showed that there was at most mere suspicion that the complainant might have been involved. There was no basis on which the organization could contend that the charge of theft had been satisfactorily proved. What it did in effect was to reverse the burden of proof by expecting the complainant to show that hisconduct was 'spotless'."
Keywords:
burden of proof; conduct; contract; evidence; fixed-term; inquiry; investigation; lack of evidence; misconduct; non-renewal of contract; presumption of innocence;
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant was accused of removing computer equipment from the work place. For that reason the organization did not renew his fixed-term contract. "There were many flaws in the procedure that the organization followed. It did not allow the complainant to be present when statements were taken from the witnesses or to question them. [...] Not only was he denied access to their statements but even their identity was concealed from him. [...] No verbatim record of the statements by the witnesses was ever produced." He never got to see the results of the investigation carried out into the matter and he was not given an opportunity to put forward any arguments in his favour. "The conclusion is that he was denied his right to defend himself before an adverse decision was taken [...]. The complainant's right of defence was seriously prejudiced."
Keywords:
conduct; contract; due process; fixed-term; flaw; inquiry; investigation; misconduct; non-renewal of contract; procedural flaw; right to reply;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
