ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By session > 122nd Session

Judgment No. 3679

Decision

The complaint is dismissed, as is EMBLís counterclaim.

Summary

The complainant contests the decision not to renew his contract.

Judgment keywords

Keywords

performance report; non-renewal of contract; complaint dismissed

Consideration 4

Extract:

In the absence of available internal appeal proceedings an official may bring his complaint directly to the Tribunal (see, for example, Judgment 2312, considerations 3 and 5).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 2312

Keywords

direct appeal to tribunal

Consideration 9

Extract:

The complainant seeks a hearing under Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Tribunalís Rules. This Article provides that a party that so applies shall identify any witness whom that party wants the Tribunal to hear and the issue that the witness is to address. The complainant states that he wishes to call his colleague, Mr A.M., to give evidence on the circumstances at the workplace. However, the reports and documents which have been provided by the parties in these proceedings fully detail those circumstances. They include the oral evidence which the complainant, Mr A.M. and others gave during the JAABís proceedings concerning those circumstances. It is therefore determined that it is unnecessary to order a hearing.

Reference(s)

ILOAT reference: Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Rules

Keywords

oral proceedings

Consideration 11

Extract:

[T]he reason for not renewing a contract must be valid, and where, as in the present case, the non-renewal is for unsatisfactory performance, the staff member must be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his performance and be given reasonable time to improve it as an aspect of the organizationís duty of care and good faith.

Keywords

performance report; non-renewal of contract

Consideration 20

Extract:

As to EMBLís counterclaim for an award of costs against the complainant, it bears recalling that the Tribunalís case law states that such costs would be awarded only in exceptional cases in which it could penalise the filing or maintenance of a complaint as being vexatious or abusive (see, for example, Judgment 1962, consideration 5, and Judgment 3043, consideration 24). As the present complaint raises, among other issues, the lawfulness of the non-renewal of the complainantís employment contract, which is neither vexatious nor abusive of process, the counterclaim is unfounded and will be dismissed.

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1962, 3043

Keywords

counterclaim



 
Last updated: 02.06.2020 ^ top