Judgment No. 1166
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The organization challenges the Tribunal's competence on the grounds that it has no employment relationship with the complainant: an unpaid associate like him does not serve CERN and is not subject to its rules, and the organization does not pay the complainant for his work. The plea fails. [...] It is not in dispute that CERN has recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction, as indeed is reflected in Rule VI 1.05 of its Staff Rules. Moreover, the complainant, who belongs to the staff of CERN as an unpaid associate, is alleging non-observance of provisions of the Staff Rules and Regulations. As for his not working for CERN, not being subject to its rules and not getting payment from it, those are issues that have a bearing, not on the Tribunal's competence, but on the receivability of his complaint. The Tribunal has jurisdiction."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF RULE VI 1.05
Keywords
status of complainant; receivability of the complaint; competence of tribunal; declaration of recognition; staff regulations and rules; salary
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
"The organization contends that the complaint is irreceivable. In its submission the complainant has no locus standi because he was not an official of CERN, had no relationship of employment with it, did not work for it and was subject to its rules only to a strictly limited extent. [...] In accordance with the terms of his appointment and [the relevant] Staff Rules the complainant was [...] free to [...] lodge a complaint as a member of CERN's staff. [...] But the complaint is irreceivable for another reason [...] the decision he impugns is irrelevant to his contract with CERN".
Keywords
decision; locus standi; status of complainant; receivability of the complaint; competence of tribunal; staff regulations and rules; contract
| 
