Judgment No. 2151
1. THE DECISION OF 21 FEBRUARY 2001 BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE OPCW IS SET ASIDE INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO THE COMPLAINANTS.
2. THE CASE IS SENT BACK TO THE ORGANISATION FOR A NEW DECISION ON THEIR REQUEST FOR CLASSIFICATION.
3. THE OPCW SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANTS AN OVERALL AMOUNT OF 2,000 EUROS IN COSTS.
4. THE APPLICATIONS TO INTERVENE ARE ALLOWED SUBJECT TO WHAT IS SAID UNDER 11.
"The Tribunal will not undertake a job classification exercise, which lies solely within the authority of the defendant. However, the succession of errors made in this case, as acknowledged both by the Classification Review Committee and the [Organisation] itself, leaves room for serious doubts concerning the objectivity of the rationale for the classifications that are being challenged. [...] The Tribunal finds that the complainants must not suffer any injury from the Organisation's impossibility to reconstitute the elements on which the classification was made. [The Tribunal] has to assess the effects of the errors committed and of the [Organisation]'s inability to indicate precisely the methods followed by the consultant in his recommendation to maintain the complainants' posts at [the same] grade."
injury; complainant; negligence; post classification; grade; post held by the complainant; post; judicial review; limits; flaw; mistake of fact; consequence
"In the Tribunal's view, the fact that [...] two staff members [...] filed no internal appeal does not prevent them from applying to intervene (see Judgment 518). The only issue to be resolved is whether the organisation's decisions on post classification apply to them. [...] This judgment should be extended to them only insofar as they have an interest, on account of their de jure and de facto position regarding post classification, in benefiting from the Tribunal's decision."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 518
intervention; cause of action; internal remedies exhausted; judgment of the tribunal; enforcement; post classification; post held by the complainant; post