L'OIT est une institution spécialisée des Nations-Unies
ILO-fr-strap
Plan du site | Contact English
> Page d'accueil > Triblex: base de données sur la jurisprudence > Par mots-clés du thésaurus > irrégularité

Judgment No. 611

Decision

THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

Consideration 9

Extract:

The organization "do not deny they made changes of form and substance [to the text of the complainant's report] without his approval. But they were fully entitled by virtue of their rights under [the applicable rule] to endorse or reject his draft: they were under no duty either to seek comments from him or to act on any he made."

Keywords

organisation; amendment to the rules; publication; right

Consideration 11

Extract:

"Although [the applicable rule] states no restriction on Unesco's rights, that does not relieve the Organization of respect for the staff member's personal rights. First, as the Tribunal has held, where the Organization state the authorship of a publication, the principle of equal treatment requires them to name all of the authors. Secondly, they may not, where there are several authors, mislead as to the contribution each has made. They may not declare that someone has written the whole of a report when he has written only part of it."

Keywords

organisation's duties; proprietary rights

Consideration 6

Extract:

"In two of its judgments the Tribunal has already ruled on a text akin to [the rule in question, which prescribes the organization's rights in work produced by its staff] and upheld it as valid. The precedents bear out Unesco's interpretation of that rule. [Furthermore], fairly similar provisions are to be found in legislation in several countries. Accordingly, even if the rule does not reflect any universally acknowledged concept it must be given some weight."

Keywords

organisation; case law; domestic law; proprietary rights; publication

Summary

Extract:

Copyright in that portion of the technical report written by the complainant during his free time and containing data from outside his official area of knowledge is wholly vested in the organization. The provision on which the organization relies is a staff rule applicable even though not based on any provision of the Staff Regulations; whenever the report was drafted and whatever its content, it is part of the complainant's professional duties and its nature remains the same; the organization had discretion to alter the complainant's draft, as they were free to publish the report at all.

Keywords

organisation; proprietary rights; publication; right

Consideration 9

Extract:

"The complainant is a man of parts and gave Unesco years of distinguished service. Unesco would have done well to treat him with greater consideration. Whatever attitude he may have taken on the termination of his appointment Unesco had no imperative reason to reject the offer of help he made them [...] Yet, though they were not as understanding as they might have been, they did not exceed their rights under the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules."

Keywords

organisation's duties; respect for dignity

Consideration 2

Extract:

There is no need to determine whether the refusal to allow the complainant to file a second rejoinder during the internal proceedings violated his right to a fair hearing. "Any defect there was must be deemed to have been removed by the present proceedings before the Tribunal. [...] Since the complainant is free to comment on any such issue before the Tribunal he has had sufficient opportunity to put his case properly, even if the Appeals Board did not fully respect his rights as a party."

Keywords

lack of injury; internal appeals body; internal appeal; tribunal; right to reply; flaw; procedural flaw

Consideration 1

Extract:

"The complainant submits that Unesco have infringed his copyright. Though not expressly alleging non-observance of a provision of the Staff Regulations or Staff Rules or a clause of his contract, he is objecting to the Organization's treatment of him as a staff member on the grounds that they have not respected his status as such. The Tribunal is therefore competent to hear the case under Article II(5) of its Statute".

Reference(s)

ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 5, OF THE STATUTE

Keywords

competence of tribunal; organisation's duties; proprietary rights



 
Dernière mise à jour: 30.03.2020 ^ haut