Remand (129, 130, 131, 132,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Remand
Total judgments found: 18

• Judgment 4779

  
  137th Session, 2024
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges her dismissal for misconduct.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; disciplinary procedure; fraud; remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2861

  
  107th Session, 2009
  World Meteorological Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 50

  Extract:

  "It is fundamental that a person not be punished twice for the same conduct or, more precisely for present purposes, that he or she not be subject to two separate and distinct adverse administrative decisions for the same conduct (see Judgment 934). As the complainant was subject to an adverse administrative decision, namely, a decision not to renew her contract on the basis of the matters relied upon in the [...] letter of 25 October 2006, it follows that the complainant's summary dismissal can be supported only on the basis of different conduct which, itself, amounted to serious misconduct or that, in some way, gave an added dimension to the conduct specified in the letter of 25 October so that it took on a more serious nature than previously was the case."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 934
  

  Keywords:

  decision; double jeopardy; non-renewal of contract; remand; serious misconduct;
  

  Consideration 83

  Extract:

  "A decision not to renew a contract is a discretionary decision that can be reviewed only on limited grounds. Those grounds include that the decision is tainted by procedural irregularities, is based on incorrect facts or essential facts have not been taken into consideration or clearly false conclusions have been drawn from the facts. The complainant argues that the decision of 25 October 2006 should be set aside on the ground that it is a disguised disciplinary measure. It is clear from the terms of the letter of 25 October 2006 [...] that that decision was taken on the basis of what was considered to be misconduct. So much is confirmed by the complainant's subsequent summary dismissal based on the warning of 25 October 2006 [...]. However, in Judgment 1405, the Tribunal stated that '[s]ince disciplinary proceedings are irrelevant to non-renewal of a fixed-term appointment the complainant may not properly allege hidden disciplinary action'. Even so, where nonrenewal is based on misconduct, that misconduct must be proved. And if the decision has not been preceded by disciplinary proceedings, the obligation of good faith requires that an organisation at least give the staff member concerned the opportunity to answer the matters levelled against him or her. Indeed, unless that opportunity is given, the organisation will be at risk of proceeding on incorrect facts or without regard to essential facts or of drawing false conclusions."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1405
  

  Keywords:

  decision; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; evidence; good faith; hidden disciplinary measure; misconduct; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2432

  
  99th Session, 2005
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "The Tribunal takes the view that, before taking a final decision, any collegiate body must meet to deliberate. A meeting may not be absolutely necessary, however, [...]if the Committee members agree on all the points of their individual reports.
  In this case, in view of the uncertainty regarding the period referred to in assessing the seriousness of the complainant's illness, of the fact that she was suffering from afflictions requiring treatment by different medical specialists and of the differences of opinion which emerged regarding the seriousness of the illness and the incapacity it caused, the Tribunal considers that the Invalidity Committee should have met before issuing its final decision. Since no meeting took place, the procedure leading up to the impugned decision is flawed even though the practitioner appointed by the complainant did not raise any objection. The decision must therefore be set aside and the case sent back to the Organisation for reconsideration of the question [...]"

  Keywords:

  advisory body; condition; due process; invalidity; procedural flaw; remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2088

  
  92nd Session, 2002
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 27

  Extract:

  The complainant seeks "a termination indemnity under Rule 109.5 which does not deal with indemnities. These are in fact dealt with under 109.7 [...] the question of a termination indemnity was not argued before the Tribunal probably because the complainant did not cite the number of the Staff Rule correctly. The Tribunal considers that the question of a claim under 109.7 (mistakenly referred to as 109.5) should be returned to the parties for argument on this single issue".

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 109.5 UNESCO STAFF RULE 109.7
  
  

  Keywords:

  adversarial proceedings; complainant; enforcement; iloat; provision; remand; request by a party; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2004

  
  90th Session, 2001
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 14

  Extract:

  Out of six candidates, only the complainant was interviewed by video conference. "While the Tribunal is not to be understood as saying that a video conference is not a perfectly acceptable method of conducting interviews, care must always be taken to ensure that no candidate is given a potentially unfair advantage by that process. Flying one person across the ocean to be interviewed while leaving a competitor from the same area at home is open to the interpretation of unequal treatment."

  Keywords:

  bias; competition; discretion; equal treatment; flaw; limits; procedural flaw; remand;
  

  Consideration 20

  Extract:

  "The Tribunal wishes to emphasise that there is nothing wrong in having a policy aimed at gender parity. For too long women have been subjected to discrimination in appointments to senior posts which can be proved by statistics. But this policy cannot be achieved by setting quotas and by reverse discrimination, in other words, by the appointment for particular posts of women who are less qualified than men. This is contrary to [Staff] Regulation 4.3 which provides that selection shall be without regard to race, creed or sex'. The policy can be achieved by different means [...] but the bottom line must always be that the person best qualified should be appointed."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF REGULATION 4.3
  
  

  Keywords:

  appointment; candidate; competition; equal treatment; priority; qualifications; remand; right; sex discrimination;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1929

  
  88th Session, 2000
  Universal Postal Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  The complainant was transferred without prior notice and without an opportunity to be heard. "Taken together, the material circumstances give grounds for considering that the impugned transfer partly constituted a hidden disciplinary sanction. [...] The impugned decision must, therefore, be set aside and the procedure resumed from the point at which it was flawed [...]."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 10 OF THE UPU STAFF REGULATIONS
  
  

  Keywords:

  disciplinary measure; hidden disciplinary measure; organisation's duties; remand; right to reply; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1893

  
  88th Session, 2000
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  By its Judgment 1814 the Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the complainant's appeal and sent the case back to the organization. The Tribunal considers that "Judgment 1814 did not imply that his case succeeded on the merits; its sole objective was to send the case back to [the organization]'s competent bodies so that a lawful decision could be taken."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1814
  

  Keywords:

  case sent back to organisation; decision; decision quashed; due process; flaw; internal appeal; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; purport; remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1892

  
  88th Session, 2000
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  "The claims relating to the failure to execute the judgment sending the case back to the organisation for a new ruling on his appeal [...] must be disallowed because the [...] procedure necessitated by the judgment quashing the original decision was [...] implemented swiftly." [After a new recommendation by the Joint Committee for Disputes, the Director General rejected the complainant's new internal appeal three and a half months after the Tribunal's judgment that was then made the subject of an application for execution.]

  Keywords:

  application for execution; case sent back to organisation; decision; decision quashed; delay; execution of judgment; internal appeal; judgment of the tribunal; remand; time limit;
  

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  By its Judgment 1814 the Tribunal set aside the decision rejecting the complainant's appeal and sent the case back to the organisation. The Tribunal considers that "it was appropriate to resume the procedure by referring the matter back to the Joint Committee for Disputes because it was the unlawful nature of the latter's opinion that led to the quashing of the decision. However, proper execution of the judgment did not necessarily imply recognition that the complainant's appeal was sound: all that was required was a new decision taken after due process."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1814
  

  Keywords:

  application for execution; case sent back to organisation; decision; decision quashed; due process; execution of judgment; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; purport; remand; report;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1376

  
  77th Session, 1994
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 15

  Extract:

  "The organization has asked that if its objections to receivability are not upheld the Tribunal send the case back to the Headquarters Board of Appeal. The Tribunal will not do so. The Board has already had the opportunity to go into the merits but declined to do so, and there is no call to afford it the opportunity again."

  Keywords:

  due process; internal appeals body; judicial review; organisation's duties; refusal; remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 866

  
  63rd Session, 1987
  General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  "The Tribunal [...] is not competent to construe the Fund Regulations: by Article 48 the United Nations Administrative Tribunal alone may hear complaints alleging breach of those Regulations."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 48 OF THE UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION FUND
  
  

  Keywords:

  competence; competence of tribunal; fund regulations; iloat statute; pension; remand; unat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 865

  
  63rd Session, 1987
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  Vide Judgment 866, consideration 5.

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 48 OF THE UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION FUND
  ILOAT Judgment(s): 866
  

  Keywords:

  competence; competence of tribunal; fund regulations; iloat statute; pension; remand; unat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 864

  
  63rd Session, 1987
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  Vide Judgment 866, consideration 5.

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 48 UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION FUND
  ILOAT Judgment(s): 866
  

  Keywords:

  competence; competence of tribunal; fund regulations; iloat statute; pension; remand; unat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 863

  
  63rd Session, 1987
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  Vide Judgment 866, consideration 5.

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 48 OF THE UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION FUND
  ILOAT Judgment(s): 866
  

  Keywords:

  competence; competence of tribunal; fund regulations; iloat statute; pension; remand; unat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 862

  
  63rd Session, 1987
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  Vide Judgment 866, consideration 5.

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 48 OF THE UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION FUND
  
  

  Keywords:

  competence; competence of tribunal; fund regulations; iloat statute; pension; remand; unat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 768

  
  59th Session, 1986
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 2

  Extract:

  "The complainant requests that the matter of the recognition of his degree should be referred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a preliminary ruling. The Tribunal has no authority to order such reference."

  Keywords:

  competence; competence of tribunal; degree; european court of justice (ecj); remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 333

  
  40th Session, 1978
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations

  Extract:

  The complainant has applied for postponement of consideration of the case by the Tribunal. Her application is not based on any relevant grounds and is disallowed.

  Keywords:

  complainant; judgment of the tribunal; remand; request by a party;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 180

  
  27th Session, 1971
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 1

  Extract:

  "The prescribed time limit must be held to have been observed if a complaint [...] has been filed with [the Tribunal] late, but was sent within the period of 90 days to the Administrative Tribunal of the United Nations. This interpretation is justified because of the links between the international organisations, and in particular by the fact that some staff members" fall within the jurisdiction of the latter Tribunal in matters concerning their pension rights.

  Keywords:

  complaint; exception; iloat; new time limit; receivability of the complaint; remand; time bar; unat;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 148

  
  23rd Session, 1970
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  The complainant suffers from total incapacity for work. He asks the Tribunal to recommend to the Joint Staff Pension Fund to pay him a permanent pension. "The Tribunal is not competent to deal with the above claim, since the United Nations Administrative Tribunal is the competent body to hear disputes relating to benefits payable by the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund."

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; complainant; disability benefit; remand; request by a party; unat; unjspf;