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

Applicable law (177, 179, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 642, 679, 827, 663, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 645, 209, 210, 211, 664, 213, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 685, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 732, 751,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Applicable law
Total judgments found: 94

1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >

  • Judgment 4020


    126th Session, 2018
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the denial of his second request to benefit from the temporary early termination of service scheme and the implied decision to reject his claim for compensation.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    As stated in Judgments 3034, under 33, and 2459, under 9, when it deals with a claim, an administrative authority must generally base itself on the provisions in force at the time it takes its decision and not on those applicable at the time the claim was submitted. Only where this approach is clearly excluded by the new provisions, or where it would result in a breach of the requirements of the principles of good faith, the non-retroactivity of administrative decisions and the protection of acquired rights, will the above rule not apply.
    If, as a result of the Tribunal setting aside an administrative decision, the competent authority must take a new decision on a claim presented to it, the Administration must base that decision on the legal and factual circumstances existing on the date on which it takes its new decision. Indeed, in that situation, none of the exceptions to the principle established by the case law cited above applies.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2459, 3034

    Keywords:

    applicable law; decision quashed;



  • Judgment 3939


    125th Session, 2018
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his appointment beyond the statutory retirement age.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    It must first be emphasised that, contrary to the complainant’s submissions, the provision of the Constitution of the ISAU setting the Treasurer’s term of office [...] does not constitute a “statutory requirement” established by the Organization’s authorities. Since, in accordance with the principle of trade-union freedom, the ISAU is an entity separate from the Administration of UNESCO, its Constitution, although subject to the Director-General’s approval, cannot be regarded as an integral part of the rules and regulations governing the Organization, and the fact that its text is reproduced as an appendix to the Human Resources Manual for ease of consultation by staff members does not by any means have the effect of incorporating it therein.

    Keywords:

    applicable law; staff union;



  • Judgment 3895


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has filed an application for interpretation and execution of Judgment 3694.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    With regard to the clarification requested under a) [...], the expression an “Appeals Committee, composed in accordance with the applicable rules”, in the present case refers to the procedural rules in force at the time of the execution of the judgment (i.e. the new examination of the appeal). It must be accepted that the procedural rules governing the composition of the Appeals Committee could be changed and that, in the event of a change, the new provisions should apply to the complainant’s appeal. In saying this the Tribunal is not expressing a view about the lawfulness of the new provisions. As the application for execution is only based on the arguments raised with respect to the application for interpretation, it is without merit.

    Keywords:

    applicable law; execution of judgment;



  • Judgment 3726


    123rd Session, 2017
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her claim for compensation on account of labour exploitation and compulsory labour.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The Tribunal has explained its purview when a party relies on the violation of a right under an ILO Convention as follows:
    “The complainant contends that the ILO acted in breach of its own international instruments when it did not renew his contract. He specifically refers to ILO Convention No. 158 and Article 3.2(c) of ILO Recommendation No. 166. [...] [T]hese instruments create obligations for Member States and do not apply to the relationships between the ILO and its officials. These latter relationships are governed by the terms of the contracts into which the person entered with the ILO and by the rules and regulations of the ILO, as interpreted and applied by the Tribunal’s case law (see, for example, Judgment 2662, under 12).” (Judgment 3448, consideration 10.)
    However, the prohibition on forced labour is not confined to the Forced Labour Convention. It is also one of the fundamental principles and rights at work, as recognized in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, 1998, which is accepted by all ILO Member States through their membership of the ILO. The Tribunal already considered in Judgment 1333, consideration 5, that:
    “The law that the Tribunal applies in entertaining claims that are put to it includes not just the written rules of the defendant organisation but the general principles of law and basic human rights.”
    Accordingly, the complainant’s claim for compensation on the ground that she was subjected to compulsory labour and labour exploitation will be considered.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1333, 2662, 3448

    Keywords:

    applicable law; forced labour; ilo instruments;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant refers to a number of international conventions. As indicated in the foregoing paragraph of this judgment, their terms are only enforceable between the States Parties, but the general principles enshrined therein may also apply to staff relations.

    Keywords:

    applicable law; international instrument;



  • Judgment 3661


    122nd Session, 2016
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the amount of the transitional allowance paid to her following her admission to the early termination of service scheme.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The fact that one Member State had notified the Organisation that it objected to these provisions does not prevent their application. Indeed, since this objection had not led to their amendment, the Organisation could not draw any legal consequences from it.

    Keywords:

    applicable law;



  • Judgment 3287


    116th Session, 2014
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who reported his suspicions that someone was unlwafully accessing his professional email account, impugned the decision to deny him access to the investigation report.

    Considerations 15 and 16

    Extract:

    "The complainant cited one judgement of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal to support a request for the provision of documents in a broadly analogous situation [...]. However the complainant cited no judgment of the Tribunal or another international administrative tribunal that has held, in the face of a provision such as paragraph 10, that an organisation must or even should make available a report containing confidential information gathered from various sources during an investigation to a person who requested it even if that person is centrally involved in the investigation. Paragraphs 9 and 10 are fundamental to maintaining a system of internal investigation that is likely to be effective and reveal to the Administration the true position surrounding any particular issue or matter which is the subject of internal audit. It is true that there is a general trend in the case law of the Tribunal towards the production rather than non-disclosure of documents in an Administration’s possession which may bear upon a staff member’s position within the organisation (see, for example, Judgment 1756, consideration 10(b)). [...]
    [T]his case provides an example of where a specific provision effectively denying disclosure for the purposes of promoting confidential communications with an internal auditor should be maintained fully and given effect. [...] The complainant had no right to be provided with a copy of the IAOD report and accordingly there was no relevant delay for which he may be entitled to damages."

    Keywords:

    applicable law; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; refusal;



  • Judgment 3214


    115th Session, 2013
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully impugns the decision not to extend his appointment beyond retirement age.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "According to the Tribunal’s case law, an administrative authority, when dealing with a claim, must generally base itself on the provisions in force at the time it takes its decision, and not on those in force at the time the claim was submitted. Only where this approach is clearly excluded by the new provisions, or where it would result in a breach of the requirements of good faith, the non-retroactivity of administrative decisions and the protection of acquired rights, will the above rule not apply (see Judgments 2459, under 9, 2986, under 32, or 3034, under 33)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2459, 2986, 3034

    Keywords:

    acquired right; applicable law; breach; date; decision; exception; general principle; good faith; non-retroactivity; patere legem; request by a party;



  • Judgment 3138


    113th Session, 2012
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    It must first be recalled that under Article II, paragraph 5, of its Statute, which defines its jurisdiction, the Tribunal is competent to hear complaints alleging non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of employment of officials and of the provisions of the Staff Regulations applicable to a particular case. On that basis, it develops its own case law which takes account of the fundamental rights enjoyed by civil servants and the general principles of the international civil service. On the other hand, it is in no way bound by the case law of other international courts, or by that of the courts of the European Communities, to which the complainant refers extensively in her submissions.

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law of other tribunals;



  • Judgment 3135


    113th Session, 2012
    Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    The Tribunal […] draws attention to the fact that, generally speaking, the terms of employment of staff members of international organisations may vary according to amendments of the existing staff regulations or staff rules and that such references to the original provisions as may be contained in their employment contracts do not prevent this.

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; applicable law; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3090


    112th Session, 2012
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "[WIPO's] employment relationship with the complainant always rested on short-term contracts [...]. These contracts were systematically renewed without any notable breaks, with the result that [...] the complainant pursued a career in the Organization for more than seven years, i.e. until the expiry of [her last] contract. This long succession of short-term contracts gave rise to a legal relationship between the complainant and WIPO which was equivalent to that on which permanent staff members of an organisation may rely. In considering that the complainant belonged to the category of short-term employees to whom the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules do not apply and who do not enjoy legal protection comparable to that enjoyed by other staff members, the defendant failed to recognise the real nature of its legal relationship with the complainant. In so doing it committed an error of law and misused the rules governing short-term contracts."

    Keywords:

    applicable law; career; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; difference; extension; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; permanent; short-term; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; temporary-indefinite; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3080


    112th Session, 2012
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "[T]he case law of the Tribunal establishes that when the term "spouse" is used in an organisation's staff rules or regulations without being otherwise defined therein, it is not limited to individuals within a marriage but may also cover persons in other forms of union (see in particular Judgments 2760, under 4, and 2860, under 9). Thus, in several recent judgments concerning cases where the applicable provisions were couched in similar language, the Tribunal held that the organisations concerned had to recognise same-sex marriages (see Judgment 2590 or Judgment 2760 [...]) or unions in the form of registered partnerships when the relevant national law made it possible to consider persons in such unions as "spouses" (see Judgments 2549 and 2550, and Judgment 2860 [...])."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2549, 2550, 2590, 2760, 2860

    Keywords:

    applicable law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; domestic law; marital status; no provision; same-sex marriage; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 3074


    112th Session, 2012
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15 & 16

    Extract:

    "[I]nternational organisations' staff members do not have a right to have all the conditions of employment laid down in the provisions of the staff rules and regulations in force at the time of their recruitment applied to them throughout their career.
    [M]ost of those conditions [can] be altered during [their] employment as a result of amendments to those provisions. Of course the position is different if, having regard to the nature and importance of the provision in question, the complainant has an acquired right to its continued application. However, according to the case law established in Judgment 61, clarified in Judgment 832 and confirmed in Judgment 986, the amendment of a provision governing an official's situation to his or her detriment constitutes a breach of an acquired right only when such an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations, or alters fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on. In order for there to be a breach of an acquired right, the amendment to the applicable text must therefore relate to a fundamental and essential term of employment within the meaning of Judgment 832 (in this connection see also Judgments 2089, 2682, 2696 or 2986). The conditions for the payment of removal expenses, in particular a limit on the volume of household goods which may be shipped at the Organization's expense, plainly do not have this character [...]."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 61, 832, 986, 2089, 2682, 2696, 2986

    Keywords:

    acquired right; amendment to the rules; applicable law; appointment; breach; career; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; contract; date; exception; international civil servant; limits; personal effects; provision; removal expenses; right; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3034


    111th Session, 2011
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 20

    Extract:

    This Tribunal is not bound by the case law of the European Union’s judicial bodies. It must further be noted that the legal context of this case law is different.

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law of other tribunals; european union;



  • Judgment 2985


    110th Session, 2011
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 20

    Extract:

    "[T]he duty of care which an international organisation owes to its officials obviously does not mean that, as a matter of principle, it should abstain from making them subject to rules which are unfavourable to them."

    Keywords:

    applicable law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; general principle; international civil servant; organisation's duties; written rule;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    "As the Tribunal stated in Judgment 2459, under 9, an administrative authority, when dealing with a claim, must generally base itself on the provisions in force at the time it takes its decision and not on those in force at the time the claim was submitted. Only where this approach is clearly excluded by the new provisions, or where it would result in a breach of the requirements of the principles of good faith, the non-retroactivity of administrative decisions and the protection of acquired rights, will the above rule not apply."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2459

    Keywords:

    acquired right; applicable law; breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; date; decision; exception; general principle; good faith; non-retroactivity; organisation's duties; provision; request by a party;



  • Judgment 2906


    108th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "In accordance with these principles, an individual decision affecting an official becomes binding on the organisation which has taken it and thus creates rights for the person concerned as soon as it has been notified to him or her in the manner prescribed by the applicable rules (see, for example, Judgments 2112, under 7(a), and 2201, under 4). As a general rule, such a decision may therefore be reversed only if two conditions are satisfied: the decision must be unlawful and it must not yet have become final (see Judgments 994, under 14, or 1006, under 2). Furthermore, where an individual decision does not create rights, provided that the principle of good faith is respected, it may be reversed at any time (see Judgment 587, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 587, 994, 1006, 2112, 2201

    Keywords:

    applicable law; binding character; condition; decision; good faith; individual decision; promotion; right;



  • Judgment 2860


    107th Session, 2009
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9, 13, 17, 19 and 21

    Extract:

    The complainant, a French national, entered into a "Civil Solidarity Contract" (PACS) under French law with his same-sex partner. The FAO refused to recognise his partner as his dependent spouse for the purpose of dependency benefits.
    "The Tribunal rejects the FAO's assertion that under the Staff Regulations and Rules, the status of 'spouse' can only arise in the context of a marriage. It is now well established in the case law that, unless the term 'spouse' is otherwise defined in the staff regulations, it is not limited to individuals within a marriage. It may also arise from other types of unions. As the Tribunal observed in Judgment 2760, under 4, in the absence of a definition of 'spouse' in the relevant regulatory provisions, 'same-sex marriages' [...] or unions in the form of 'registered partnerships' [have] to be recognised by these organisations where the applicable national legislation enable[s] persons who ha[ve] contracted such unions to be regarded as 'spouses' (see Judgments 2549 and 2550)'. (See also Judgment 2643, under 6.)"
    "Accordingly, as the Tribunal also observed in Judgment 2549, under 11, it is necessary to determine whether in the light of the provisions of French law, the complainant and his partner should be considered as 'spouses' within the meaning of the FAO Staff Regulations and Rules."
    "[The materials of the file] demonstrate that just as in a marriage relationship, PACS partners are required to provide each other with financial support and are jointly liable for debts incurred for daily living. In matters such as immigration, social security, health insurance, home leave and relocation of civil servants, special leave for persons bound by a PACS, inheritance fees and income taxes, PACS partners are treated the same as spouses in a marriage. In a significant recent development, reference is made to the existence of the PACS and the name of the partners in the official register of personal status of individuals who have entered into a PACS, just as marital status is recorded for married persons."
    "Not only does a PACS change the legal status of the partners in relation to each other, but it also changes the legal status of the partners in relation to the State in a variety of ways enumerated earlier and in ways that mirror the status of married couples in relation to the State. Just as in a marriage, a PACS establishes a legal relationship of mutual dependence. Further, and at the very least, in the absence of a contrary provision in the Staff Regulations and Rules, the principle of non-discrimination requires that for the purposes of dependency benefits the term 'spouse' be interpretated as applicable to a relationship of mutual dependence under the relevant national law."
    "In conclusion, having regard to the materials filed in this proceeding, the Tribunal is satisfied that the provisions of French law give rise to a relationship of mutual dependence, and accordingly, the complainant and his partner must be regarded as 'spouses' under the Staff Regulations and Rules. In these circumstances, the Director-General erred in refusing to recognise the status of the complainant and his partner for the purpose of dependency benefits and, therefore, his decision will be set aside."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2549, 2550, 2643, 2760

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; dependant; domestic law; family allowance; marital status; same-sex marriage; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2760


    105th Session, 2008
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant, a Canadian national, married a person of the same sex, as she is permitted to do under the law in force in Canada. She immediately informed the Agency of her new marital status and applied for the dependency benefits to which staff members with a spouse are eligible, but her application was rejected. The defendant points out that, for the purpose of applying its Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, it has a definition of the term "spouse" which refers only to the partners of a union between persons of opposite sex, since the Guide to Dependency Benefits, which was drawn up for the staff, indicates that the term "'[s]pouse' for all purposes of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules is defined to mean the husband or wife". "But this mere information document, which was prepared by the Administration and has no normative value, clearly cannot prescribe the adoption of a restrictive definition which does not appear in the applicable texts themselves.
    Furthermore, while the Tribunal notes that the same definition was also given in a Notice to the Staff of 11 July 2005, that document likewise could not narrow the scope of the concept of 'spouse' to which the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules refer. Although the secretariat of an organisation may always circulate a Notice to the Staff to clarify certain provisions of its staff regulations and rules, such a notice cannot impose on staff any restrictive conditions other than those stipulated in the provisions themselves."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Guide to Dependency Benefits

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; applicable law; binding character; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; definition; dependant; domestic law; enforcement; family allowance; information note; limits; marital status; organisation; precedence of rules; provision; publication; purpose; refusal; request by a party; same; same-sex marriage; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 2672


    104th Session, 2008
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9 and 10

    Extract:

    "A staff association or union is, in essence, a voluntary association of employees and/or others in a relationship pursuant to which they perform services by way of personal exertion, who have agreed together to act collectively [...] to protect and promote their industrial interests. The powers of the association may extend to the protection and promotion of the industrial interests of those who are eligible to belong to the association. Many countries require other formalities including, sometimes, registration under the relevant domestic law. Those laws cannot apply to a staff association or union the membership of which is restricted to international civil servants. However, that is not to say that no formality is necessary for the formation of a staff association or union representing international civil servants.

    For the creation of a staff association or union representing international civil servants, there must, at the very least, be some means of identifying the agreement voluntarily to associate for the purpose of protecting and promoting the industrial interests of members, the terms of that agreement and the means by which it may be varied, both in relation to individual employees and the purposes or objects of the association. [...] [B]ecause it is a voluntary association, there must be an agreement as to the persons by or through whom the association acts, the means by which those persons are selected or elected, the matters in respect of which they have authority to act and the powers that they have in relation to those matters. In the absence of agreement as to each of those matters, the agreement to associate would, in accordance with general principles of law, be void for uncertainty. And to have an agreement covering those matters, there must be rules incorporated in a charter, a statute or some other document to which the members subscribe and by which they agree to be bound."

    Keywords:

    applicable law; collective bargaining; collective rights; effect; freedom of association; freedom of speech; general principle; staff claim; staff representative; staff union agreement; written rule;



  • Judgment 2643


    103rd Session, 2007
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant, a British national, entered into a "Civil Solidarity Contract" (PACS) under French law with his same-sex partner and had his partnership registered under the Civil Partnership Act applicable to British citizens. The ITU refused to recognise his partner as his dependent spouse for determination of the benefits pertaining to that status. "The Tribunal has accepted in several recent judgments that same-sex marriages (see Judgment 2590) and unions taking the form of 'registered partnerships' must be recognised where the national legislation applicable to the staff member concerned allows persons who have contracted such unions to be treated as 'spouses' (see Judgments 2549 and 2550). The important difference between the present case and those previously decided lies in the fact that the ITU Staff Regulations and Staff Rules explicitly define the concept of spouses as denoting husband and wife in a large number of provisions, and that, contrary to the situations examined in Judgments 2549 and 2550, the ITU refuses to accept that same-sex unions lawfully contracted under the national legislation of the official concerned may be taken into consideration for the purpose of applying the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. It follows that the defendant was not wrong in asserting that, in the light of the case law and the applicable Regulations and Rules as they currently stand, the Secretary-General was barred from giving the term 'spouse' the broad interpretation requested."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2549, 2550, 2590

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; dependant; difference; domestic law; enforcement; family allowance; interpretation; judgment of the tribunal; marital status; provision; purpose; refusal; same; same-sex marriage; social benefit; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 2636


    103rd Session, 2007
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "The terms of Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal [...] dictate that various [...] claims for relief are not receivable. The claim that the Tribunal make appropriate orders to enable investigation of the complainant's allegations by the Swiss authorities falls into this category. The complainant's rights are those that derive from the terms of his appointment, the applicable Staff Regulations and those general legal principles recognised by the Tribunal as applicable to all international civil servants. None of these confer any right on the complainant to rely on Swiss law in his claims against WIPO and, consequently, there is no power in the Tribunal to make any order in that regard."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal

    Keywords:

    applicable law; claim; competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; domestic law; general principle; iloat statute; inquiry; international civil servant; provision; receivability of the complaint; right; staff regulations and rules; written rule;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >


 
Last updated: 19.06.2019 ^ top