ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword > work appraisal

Judgment No. 284

Decision

THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

Consideration 2

Extract:

"In such circumstances the principle which the Tribunal applies is that it will not interfere, except upon particular and limited grounds such as prejudice or incorrect appreciation of facts or formal or procedural irregularity, with decisions of the Director-General."

Keywords

step; increment withheld; salary; judicial review; discretion

Consideration 3

Extract:

The complainant seeks the removal of a minute which "consists of the supervisor's comments on the complainant's minute of appeal from the decision to with hold his increment. These memoranda were properly placed in the complainant's confidential personnel file in accordance with [the relevant Manual provision]. Under [that provision] the complainant is entitled to receive copies of them and he has in fact had copies. There is no rule authorising their removal on the ground that they are detrimental."

Keywords

confidential evidence; personal file; elements

Consideration 1

Extract:

"A circular of this character does not, as do the Staff Regulations, form part of a staff member's terms of appointment and so as a general rule a departure from its provisions does not of itself give him any right to relief [...] If a circular prescribes a certain procedure to be followed, the Tribunal will consider, not necessarily whether the procedure has been exactly followed, but whether any departure from it has prejudiced the staff member in a way that affects his rights."

Keywords

procedure before the tribunal; injury; lack of injury; administrative instruction; terms of appointment; judicial review; consequence

Consideration 3

Extract:

"[T]he officer-in-charge [...] and [...] the Director-General had before them all the relevant documents which the complainant also had seen and they had also the complainant's written replies. The question which they had to consider was not whether the complainant's evaluation of his services was to be preferred to that of his division director, but whether the latter was unjustified. On such a question a staff member cannot claim a right to an oral hearing; this must be within the discretion of the authority concerned and normally it would not be necessary."

Keywords

right to reply; work appraisal; discretion



 
Last updated: 07.04.2020 ^ top