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

Recovery of overpayment (211,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Recovery of overpayment
Total judgments found: 21

1, 2 | next >

  • Judgment 4166


    128th Session, 2019
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges Eurocontrol’s decision to recover various sums which it considers were unduly paid to him.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 4139


    128th Session, 2019
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term contract as a result of her post having been abolished.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    It is a general principal of law that any sum which has been paid in error may be recovered, provided that the request for reimbursement is made in reasonable time (see, inter alia, Judgments 1195, consideration 3, 2230, consideration 13, 2565, considerations 7(a) and 7(c), and 2899, consideration 20).
    [...]
    According to the Tribunal’s case law, an organization’s right to recover an overpayment must be partially – or fully – denied if the circumstances of the case show that the reimbursement sought would be unfair or inequitable for the staff member concerned (see Judgments 1111, consideration 2, 1849, considerations 16 and 18, and 2899, aforementioned, consideration 20).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1111, 1195, 1849, 2230, 2565, 2899, 2899

    Keywords:

    recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 3441


    119th Session, 2015
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal found that UNIDO breached its duty of care, good faith and mutual trust to the complainant.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    extension; fixed-term; joinder; recovery of overpayment;

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    [T]he decision to recover payments to which there was no entitlement is an administrative decision that the Administration could have made once it was satisfied that the complainant had not provided evidence to support the entitlement to the payments.

    Keywords:

    recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 3289


    116th Session, 2014
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant received a written censure for failing to comply with the procedure of authorizing outside activities and remuneration.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "[I]t is observed that there is no limitation period in relation to disciplinary proceedings in the Staff Regulations and Rules. The complainant’s attempt to analogise from the Staff Rule concerning the recovery of an overpayment within one year is without merit. An overpayment is in no way analogous to misconduct. It is true that, if possible, an organisation should promptly take action when the possibility of misconduct on the part of a staff member comes to its attention. However, the complainant’s assertion that an alleged violation of a Staff Rule, if considered serious, “has to be investigated promptly and at the latest one year after the Administration took notice thereof” has no foundation in law or in the Staff Regulations and Rules."

    Keywords:

    breach; disciplinary procedure; misconduct; organisation's duties; recovery of overpayment; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 3226


    115th Session, 2013
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the calculation of her salary for one particular month and the refusal of WIPO to spread the reimbursement of the amount unduly paid to her.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    reckoning; recovery of overpayment; salary;



  • Judgment 3201


    115th Session, 2013
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants, who are pensioners, challenge the recovery of overpayments.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 3167


    114th Session, 2013
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the request by the EPO for the recovery of household allowance overpayments.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    family allowance; recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 3020


    111th Session, 2011
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    WTO Staff Rule 106.11 provides that "[n]ational income tax on salaries, allowances, indemnities or grants paid by the WTO shall be refunded to the staff member by the WTO." The complainant considers that her salary is indirectly taxed, because it is included in the assessment of her husband's rate of income tax. The Organization rejected her claims for reimbursement of what she describes as "over-taxation by the Swiss tax authorities". The Tribunal holds that "[t]he refusal to provide compensation for the additional amount of tax unfairly levied on the couple's income solely because of the complainant's earned income, although it was exempt from taxation, would have a paradoxical effect. A rule designed to guarantee equal wages would lead to unjustifiable inequality between an official whose earned income was unduly taxed although it was by law exempt from taxation and an official whose tax-exempt salary was taken into account for assessment purposes, thus reducing his/her spouse's disposable income after tax and therefore his/her economic capacity from which the official living with him/her naturally benefits. The impugned decision is therefore unlawful."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: WTO Staff Rule 106.11

    Keywords:

    allowance; breach; compensatory allowance; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; deduction; domestic law; effect; equal treatment; grounds; international civil servant; marital status; organisation; payment; purpose; rate; reckoning; recovery of overpayment; reduction; refund; refusal; request by a party; safeguard; salary; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; tax; written rule;



  • Judgment 2899


    108th Session, 2010
    European Free Trade Association
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 29

    Extract:

    The complainant refused to accede to EFTA's request for reimbursement of an amount allegedly overpaid.
    "Contrary to his submissions, the complainant could not refuse [...] to comply with the Association's express and repeated requests for reimbursement. As the internal appeal procedure does not have a suspensory effect, and even though [EFTA] would no doubt have been wiser to await its completion before demanding payment of the debt, he was bound to comply with these requests. His refusal to accede to them thus constituted misconduct which could lead to a disciplinary sanction [...]."

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; disciplinary measure; internal appeal; procedure; recovery of overpayment; refund; refusal; request by a party; staff member's duties; suspensory effects;

    Consideration 20

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal's case law has it that an international organisation which has mistakenly overpaid an official must take into account any circumstances which would make it unfair or unjust to require repayment of the sum in question - at least the full amount thereof. Relevant circumstances include the good or bad faith of the staff member, the sort of mistake made, the respective responsibilities of the organisation and the person concerned for the causes of the mistake and the inconvenience to which the staff member would be put by repayment that is required as a result of the organisation's oversight (see Judgments 1111, under 2, and 1849, under 16 and 18)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1111, 1849

    Keywords:

    case law; cause; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; consequence; equity; good faith; international civil servant; liability; mistake of fact; organisation; organisation's duties; recovery of overpayment; refund; request by a party;

    Consideration 21

    Extract:

    "[T]he decision of the chief executive officer of an organisation to recover an unduly paid sum of money falls within his or her discretionary authority and is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal, but this decision must nevertheless be censured if it is tainted with a formal or procedural irregularity, or if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; decision quashed; discretion; executive head; formal flaw; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; procedural flaw; recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 2847


    107th Session, 2009
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    The complainant received family allowances paid at the full rate by Eurocontrol in respect of his three children but did not declare to the Agency that his partner was drawing family allowances from the competent national social security authority. According to Article 67(2) of the Staff Regulations, the amount of family allowances that Eurocontrol was paying him should have been reduced by the amount of the family allowances received by his partner. The complainant objects to the fact that the Agency has recovered the amount overpaid from the outset, i.e. over a five-year period, whereas in the opposite case, when the Agency makes a mistake to the detriment of an official, it usually benefits from rules of prescription which enable it greatly to reduce the amounts reimbursed.
    "[A]ccording to the Tribunal's case law, a claim for recovery of undue payment is not imprescriptible and must be brought - even in the absence of any provision in writing to this effect - in reasonable time (see Judgments 53, under 4, and 2565, under 7(c)). However [...] the five-year period concerned by the recovery of the overpayment [...] cannot be regarded in this case as an unreasonable length of time, particularly because the disputed reimbursement arises from concealment on the part of the complainant and because Eurocontrol did not fail to take the necessary steps to recover the sums in question."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 67(2) of the Staff Regulations governing officials of the Eurocontrol Agency
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 53, 2565

    Keywords:

    accumulation; amount; breach; case law; dependent child; difference; domestic law; family allowance; injury; limits; misrepresentation; no provision; organisation's duties; payment; period; rate; reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; request by a party; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; time bar;

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    The complainant received family allowances paid at the full rate by Eurocontrol in respect of his three children but did not declare to the Agency that his partner was drawing family allowances from the competent national social security authority. According to Article 67(2) of the Staff Regulations, the amount of family allowances that Eurocontrol was paying him should have been reduced by the amount of the family allowances received by his partner. The complainant had to reimburse the full amount overpaid.
    "The evidence on file shows that the complainant deliberately refrained from declaring to Eurocontrol the family allowances drawn by his partner, although he had been duly informed that, in the Agency's view, they should be deducted from those he was receiving. While it was open to the complainant to challenge - if necessary before the Tribunal - any deductions made by the Agency in calculating the payments, he could not choose of his own accord to evade his duty of disclosure. He must therefore be deemed to have been aware of the unlawfulness of the disputed payments, which was indeed sufficiently obvious for it to be concluded that he could not have been unaware of it."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 67(2) of the Staff Regulations governing officials of the Eurocontrol Agency

    Keywords:

    accumulation; amount; breach; dependent child; domestic law; family allowance; flaw; misrepresentation; payment; rate; reckoning; recovery of overpayment; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2565


    101st Session, 2006
    World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7 (c)

    Extract:

    "A claim for recovery of undue payment is not imprescriptible and must be brought in reasonable time (see Judgment 53, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 53

    Keywords:

    reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; request by a party; time bar;

    Consideration 7 (a)

    Extract:

    "According to a general principle of law, whoever has paid a sum mistakenly is entitled to recover it within a reasonable time provided the person can prove that the sum was paid in the mistaken belief that it was owed (see Judgments 497, under 6, and 1195, under 3)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 497, 1195

    Keywords:

    amount; burden of proof; condition; general principle; payment; reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; right; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 2230


    95th Session, 2003
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    The complainant claims that a payment made to him by mistake should not have been recovered from him three years later. "While it is a general principle of law that lapse of time may extinguish an obligation, the complainant has not cited any provision relative to recovery of overpayments [...] establishing a prescriptive period beyond which the undue payments may no longer be recovered."

    Keywords:

    definition; discontinuance; general principle; payment; period; provision; recovery of overpayment; request by a party; right;



  • Judgment 1849


    87th Session, 1999
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 18 and 19

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal considers that, in accordance with its jurisprudence, if an official receives an overpayment by mistake it should be reimbursed. Nevertheless, the organization should take into account any circumstances which would make it unfair or unjust to require repayment. [...] In the Tribunal's opinion there is no indebtedness by the complainant to the organization. It was responsible for making payments on behalf of the United Nations, but has been fully reimbursed. The organization therefore, was not entitled to withhold the grants due or make deductions from salary under rule 380.5.2 since the complainant was not indebted to it."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: STAFF RULE 380.5.2 OF WHO

    Keywords:

    amount; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; criteria; debt; deduction; equity; exception; recovery of overpayment; refund; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 1366


    77th Session, 1994
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 13 and 14

    Extract:

    The complainant's education grant gave rise to an overpayment. He pleads that there is a time limit for the recovery of overpayments. The UPU observes that "any payment made in error may be recovered" but it has nevertheless waived some of the sum due. "In the circumstances the time limit the union has set is much to the complainant's advantage and his plea under this head therefore fails."

    Keywords:

    amount; education expenses; recovery of overpayment; refund; time bar; time limit; unjust enrichment;

    Considerations 11 and 12

    Extract:

    The complainant's education allowance gave rise to an overpayment. He alleges breach of the rule against retroactivity. "He is wrong. [...] What is at issue is the recovery of overpayments; and the complainant [...] must have been aware of the patent disproportion between the advances he was receiving and the education expenses he had actually incurred. So he may not properly plead any mistake in interpretation."

    Keywords:

    amount; education expenses; non-retroactivity; recovery of overpayment; refund; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 1347


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

    Considerations 15 and 16

    Extract:

    The complainant received a study allowance for her tuition costs in an amount greater than she was entitled to. The PAHO asked her to repay the overpayment and took away some of her responsibilities. She regards the removal of certain responsibilities as unwarranted disciplinary action. But "the PAHO was entitled to take administrative action to prevent lapses in the future. Changing her duties for those reasons may not be regarded as a disciplinary measure either."

    Keywords:

    allowance; amendment to the rules; disciplinary measure; education expenses; organisation's interest; post description; recovery of overpayment; unjust enrichment;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The complainant received financial aid from the PAHO to pursue her studies. Her university waived part of her tuition fees so that the cost to her was less than the amount she collected. "Having obtained financial benefits to which she was not entitled, the complainant was under an obligation to refund the over-payments and the PAHO was entitled to recover them."

    Keywords:

    allowance; amount; education expenses; recovery of overpayment; refund; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 1195


    73rd Session, 1992
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 4 and 5

    Extract:

    The complainant having received undue payment, the Union claimed a refund. The complainant challenges this on the grounds that "because of prescription the debt has become unenforceable. There is indeed a widely recognised principle that lapse of time may extinguish an obligation, but the difficulty here is that the Union's rules set no time limit for such extinctive prescription." However the Tribunal holds that the time between the payment of the material sums and the Union's request for their repayment "was not long enough to warrant declaring the undue payments irrecoverable. Not only is the period of extinctive prescription much longer in most national systems of law, but the complainant pleads no personal difficulty or hardship in making repayment: the Union is not claiming lump-sum reimbursement but is spreading it over eighteen months."

    Keywords:

    debt; domestic law; reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; refund; time limit;

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "It is a general principle of law that any sum paid on a mistaken assumption of fact is recoverable. And since the complainant received payment on the assumption that her husband was her dependant and since that assumption later proved to be mistaken, the sums she received are, according to that principle, recoverable."

    Keywords:

    family allowance; general principle; recovery of overpayment; refund; right;



  • Judgment 1111


    71st Session, 1991
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    The complainant, having tendered her resignation, was mistakenly paid a termination indemnity upon the transfer of Interpol's Headquarters to Lyons. The organisation ordered repayment. "[T]he Secretary General's decision to claim the sum back from her is a discretionary one. In deciding whether to demand full or part repayment he takes accounts of such factors as the staff member's good or bad faith, the sort of mistake that has been made, the organization's own and the staff member's negligence and the inconvenience which the demand, made necessary by the organization's own oversight, will put the staff member to. So the Tribunal will exercise only a limited power of review over the decision."

    Keywords:

    discretion; good faith; judicial review; negligence; recovery of overpayment; terminal entitlements;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    An earlier decision had informed the complainant that she would not qualify for a termination indemnity if she refused to move to Lyons when the organization moved there. However, a later decision granted her the indemnity. The Tribunal observes that "the very inconsistency between the two decisions shows that the later one, which had no basis in law, was a mistake." Since the decision was materially wrong Interpol was entitled under Article 30 of the Staff Regulations to claim payment back from her.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 30 OF THE INTERPOL STAFF REGULATIONS

    Keywords:

    recovery of overpayment; withdrawal of decision;



  • Judgment 497


    48th Session, 1982
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    as the money [an education grant] was paid by mistake, prima facie it is recoverable. "but the extent to which recovery will be ordered depends on the circumstances of the case. in this case the tribunal considers that it will be sufficient if the complainant repays half."

    Keywords:

    allowance; complaint allowed in part; condition; education expenses; recovery of overpayment; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 123


    20th Session, 1968
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    In approving the complainant's request for application for repatriation grant, the organisation misinterpreted the material provisions. Payment to the complainant was approved ex gratia. It was however subject to a provision which the organisation "implicitly waived [...] by refraining from claiming repayment of this amount in the course of the present procedure. [The] complainant's right to keep the money he has received is thus not in question."

    Keywords:

    ex gratia; recovery of overpayment; repatriation allowance; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 81


    14th Session, 1965
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "Although it is true that the right to recovery of payments made by mistake is generally recognised and may, in consequence, be assimilated to a statutory right, [the official] would not have been in a position to claim the reimbursement of the payments he had made, with full knowledge of the facts, into the [...] funds, by virtue of a decision which had been rendered final as far as he was concerned. Neither has the complainant any right to do so."

    Keywords:

    contributions; pension; recovery of overpayment; refund; right; unjspf;

1, 2 | next >


 
Last updated: 23.07.2019 ^ top