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

Judgment No. 69

Decision

1. The decision, dated 9 August 1962, not to confirm the appointment of the complainant at the end of the probationary period is quashed.
2. The remainder of the conclusions of the complaint are dismissed.

Consideration 2

Extract:

"Far from having been able normally to defend his interests before the Director-General, the complainant [...] was not invited to comment on the documents which were submitted without his knowledge. [...] Even if the appeals procedure was properly complied with, the previous infringement of the right to be heard was not thereby corrected, since the officer who took the first decision had based himself to a considerable extent on evaluations which the higher authority apparently accepted without checking them all personally."

Keywords

internal appeal; right to reply; procedural flaw

Consideration 2

Extract:

The right to be heard was doubly ignored. The Regional Director terminated the appointment of the complainant without submitting to him a period evaluation report or affording him the opportunity of justifying himself. In the appeals proceedings, reports were produced the existence of which the complainant only became aware during the proceedings before the Tribunal and with regard to which he accordingly had not opportunity to state his case in time. The decision to terminate the appointment is quashed.

Keywords

decision quashed; case sent back to organisation; disclosure of evidence; right to reply; probation report; flaw; procedural flaw

Consideration 4

Extract:

"Infringement of the right to be heard being sufficient to entail the quashing of the decision complained of, the Tribunal does not have to consider whether any other reason would also have justified this conclusion."

Keywords

right to reply; flaw; procedural flaw

Consideration 5

Extract:

"The quashing of the decision impugned not being impossible or not seeming inappropriate, the Tribunal could not base itself on article VIII of its Statute in order to grant an indemnity to the complainant who, moreover, has not claimed any indemnity."

Reference(s)

ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE

Keywords

complaint allowed; decision quashed; probationary period; termination of employment

Consideration 2

Extract:

"By virtue of this right, before a decision to his detriment is taken, every official should have the opportunity of acquainting himself with the elements taken as the basis for this decision and of explaining himself with regard to them. It follows, in particular, that he cannot be the subject of a termination decision as long as he has not received the evaluation reports concerning him and has not been allowed the opportunity to dispute their contents. The principle stated, which applies even in the absence of express texts, is, moreover, embodied in the provisions of [the Staff Rules]."

Keywords

right to reply; work appraisal; performance report; probationary period; probation report; termination of employment; flaw; consequence



 
Last updated: 21.09.2017 ^ top