Judgment No. 2636
1. The decision of 13 December 2005 is set aside to the extent that it referred the complainant's claims with respect to the events in his office on 28 June 2005 to the Internal Audit and Oversight Division. Those claims are remitted to the Director General for fresh consideration, including, if necessary, by the WIPO Appeal Board.
2. WIPO shall pay the complainant 5,000 Swiss francs by way of moral damages for its failure to properly and promptly investigate the events in his office on 28 June 2005.
3. It shall pay him 2,000 francs in costs.
4. The complaint is otherwise dismissed, as are the applications to intervene.
"[T]he four persons with respect to whom the complainant seeks the imposition of sanctions have filed applications to intervene in these proceedings and, in the alternative, seek to have their applications treated as complaints. These applications must be refused. So far as concerns the applications to intervene, none of the applicants is in the same position in fact or law as the complainant (see Judgment 2237)."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2237
complaint; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; complainant; intervention; disciplinary measure; difference; refusal; request by a party; right; same
"The terms of Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal [...] dictate that various [...] claims for relief are not receivable. The claim that the Tribunal make appropriate orders to enable investigation of the complainant's allegations by the Swiss authorities falls into this category. The complainant's rights are those that derive from the terms of his appointment, the applicable Staff Regulations and those general legal principles recognised by the Tribunal as applicable to all international civil servants. None of these confer any right on the complainant to rely on Swiss law in his claims against WIPO and, consequently, there is no power in the Tribunal to make any order in that regard."
ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal
claim; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; international civil servant; receivability of the complaint; competence of tribunal; inquiry; applicable law; general principle; written rule; domestic law; iloat statute; staff regulations and rules; provision; contract; right
"By Article VIII of its Statute the Tribunal is empowered to rescind impugned decisions, to order the performance of obligations and to award compensation. It is not empowered to order apologies. Nor is it empowered to require undertakings as to performance of obligations in the future, as claimed by the complainant."
ILOAT reference: Article VIII of the Statute of the Tribunal
claim; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; organisation; competence of tribunal; decision quashed; organisation's duties; iloat statute; allowance; payment; apology
The complainant, a former President of the Staff Council, asks the Tribunal to declare null and void the extraordinary general assembly session and the ensuing Staff Council election. "Article II of the Tribunal's Statute [...] requires that the complainant's claim for annulment of the election of the new Staff Council be dismissed. So too must his claim that a new election be conducted without delay by a neutral body (see Judgment 78). Such rights as the complainant has in relation to the affairs of the Staff Association and the Staff Council derive from the Statutes of the Staff Association. They do not concern the terms of his appointment, the applicable Staff Regulations or those general principles of law applicable to international civil servants."
ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute
ILOAT Judgment(s): 78
competence of tribunal; iloat statute; staff union; election