Judgment No. 1696
1. The impugned decision is set aside.
2. The Council shall pay her damages to be reckoned as set out under 9 and interest thereon at the rate of 8 per cent a year as from 28 November 1995.
3. It shall pay her 100,000 Belgian francs in costs.
4. Her other claims are dismissed.
"The wording of Regulation 9 (b)(3) is plain: the decision to terminate an appointment at the end of probation may be taken only 'after consultation with an advisory body', the Staff Committee." The Organisation submits that it need only speak to the Chairman. But the Committee has several members who are supposed to function as a single body. The Orgnanisation's argument postulates prior delegation of authority to the Committee's Chairman or officers. To be valid, however, such delegation must have some basis in the rules. Failing that, any action "will be ultra vires" there being wrongful failure to consult the Staff Committee, the impugned decision must, in line with patere legem, be set aside.
Organization rules reference: CCC STAFF REGULATIONS 9(B)(3)
decision; advisory body; due process; organisation's duties; patere legem; staff regulations and rules; probationary period; termination of employment; delegated authority; procedural flaw; advisory opinion
"The [administrative] practice on which [the Organization] does rely can have no effect in law. The conditions that make a practice an enforceable custom are not met. The alleged rule is not widely recognised as binding; indeed opinion varies on what it actually is."
applicable law; practice; condition; purport