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

Terms of appointment

You searched for:
Keywords: Terms of appointment
Total judgments found: 1,744

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 | next >



  • Judgment 3272


    116th Session, 2014
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the decision not to appoint her to a vacant post due to procedural flaw and violation of her right to due process.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    competition; disclosure of evidence;



  • Judgment 3271


    116th Session, 2014
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The application for interpretation of Judgment 2938 is rejected by the Tribunal, while the application for execution of the same judgment is allowed.

    Judgment's keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2938

    Keywords:

    compassionate leave; compensatory allowance; reckoning; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 3268


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the establishment of a staff report containing negative comments.

    Considerations 9, 12 and 13

    Extract:

    "Assessment of an employee’s merit during a specified period involves a value judgement; for this reason, the Tribunal must recognise the discretionary authority of the bodies responsible for conducting such an assessment. Of course, it must ascertain whether the marks given to the employee have been worked out in full conformity with the rules, but it cannot substitute its own opinion for these bodies’ assessment of the qualities, performance and conduct of the person concerned. The Tribunal will therefore interfere in this field only if the decision was taken without authority, if it was based on an error of law or fact, a material fact was overlooked, or a plainly wrong conclusion was drawn from the facts, or if it was taken in breach of a rule of form or procedure, or if there was abuse of authority (see Judgments 2834, under 7, and 3006, under 7). This limitation on the Tribunal’s power of review naturally applies to both the mark given in a staff report and the comments accompanying that mark in the report."
    "The restraint which the Tribunal must exercise [...] does not mean that it can disregard the fact that the comment accompanying the complainant’s productivity rating considerably detracts from the marking “good” and that the countersigning officer’s comments underscore that effect. [...] It follows from the foregoing that the [...] disputed staff report must be set aside."

    Keywords:

    decision quashed; discretion; insurance benefit; international civil servant; limits; rating; supervisor; tribunal;

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    limits; performance report; rating;



  • Judgment 3267


    116th Session, 2014
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugned the decision not to waive the time limit for lodging an internal appeal, claiming that his heavy workload constituted an exceptional circumstance justifying the grant of a waiver.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    discretion; post classification; time limit;



  • Judgment 3266


    116th Session, 2014
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision not to promote him on the ground that the standard used was too demanding (exceptional performance).

    Considerations 13, 14 and 15

    Extract:

    "At no point in the guidelines was there either expressly or impliedly a requirement that the individual who was being considered for promotion had to, in order to secure promotion, have performed their work or discharge their responsibilities in an exceptional manner.
    It is true that twice in the Guidelines [...] the word “exceptionally” appeared. However, its use served the purpose of stating that promotion on merit would not be a usual or ordinary feature of employment within WIPO. That would doubtless be achieved by applying some rigour in the assessment process when applying the specified criteria. It would also be achieved if, as a practical matter (and as contemplated by paragraph 13 of the Guidelines [...]), a person was to be considered for promotion only if recommended by a supervisor and that supervisors exercise restraint in making such recommendations.
    In the present case, the application of a test or standard that the complainant had to have discharged his responsibilities in an exceptional manner before he was promoted informed the decision-making of the Panel and the Appeal Board. Critically, for present purposes, it was also the test or standard used by the Director General in deciding, effectively, that the complainant should not be promoted [...]. It was a test or standard that misstated, and almost certainly overstated (in the sense that was too demanding), the criteria in the Guidelines."

    Keywords:

    criteria; mistake of law; promotion; staff regulations and rules;

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    decision; flaw; promotion; recommendation;



  • Judgment 3264


    116th Session, 2014
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the decision not to renew her contract after an extension of her probationary period and is granted damages.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    breach; confidential evidence; decision; disclosure of evidence; discretion; due process; duty to inform; extension; general principle; good faith; judicial review; non-renewal; organisation's duties; performance report; probation; procedural flaw; respect for dignity; right to reply; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "[D]uring the extension of the probationary period, [...] its duty to act in good faith obligated the Organization to give the complainant guidance and a meaningful opportunity to improve measured against objective standards."

    Keywords:

    good faith; organisation's duties; work appraisal;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The purpose of probation is to give an organisation an opportunity to evaluate a probationer’s suitability for a position (see Judgment 2646, under 5). This gives rise to corollary obligations on the part of the organisation to warn a staff member in a timely manner that her or his performance is unsatisfactory, to give the staff member guidance and an opportunity to improve and to set objectives against which improvement can be measured. These are “fundamental aspects of the duty of an international organisation to act in good faith towards its staff members and to respect their dignity” (see Judgment 2414, under 23)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414, 2646

    Keywords:

    duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; probation; respect for dignity; unsatisfactory service;



  • Judgment 3263


    116th Session, 2014
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The application for execution of Judgment 3032 was dismissed by the Tribunal.

    Judgment's keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3032

    Keywords:

    competition cancelled; counterclaim; refusal;



  • Judgment 3262


    116th Session, 2014
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who applied for the position of Legal Advisor, was offered the post, but at a grade lower than that at which it was advertised.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; candidate; compensation; contract; grade; moral injury; offer; offer withdrawn; post; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3261


    116th Session, 2014
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal considered that the application for execution of Judgment 3036 was justified by the defendant’s delay in executing that judgment.

    Judgment's keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3036

    Keywords:

    organisation's duties; reinstatement; suspension;



  • Judgment 3259


    116th Session, 2014
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The application for execution of Judgments 2830 and 3014 was rejected by the Tribunal.

    Judgment's keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830, 3014

    Keywords:

    compensatory allowance; decision quashed; organisation's duties; reinstatement; termination;



  • Judgment 3257


    116th Session, 2014
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision to offer him a one-year extension of his fixed-term contract rather than the two-year extensions he had previously received.

    Considerations 18 and 19

    Extract:

    "[T]he Commission breached its own rules regarding the procedure by which the performance appraisal report, which contained the recommendation for the extension of the contract, was to be communicated to the Personnel Division. Paragraph 3.2 of Administrative Directive No. 20 (Rev.2) requires the proposal for the extension of the contract to be submitted to the Personnel Division with a justification of the recommendation that was stated in the proposal. The performance appraisal report was also to be submitted with them.
    There are good reasons for this provision. The proposal containing the recommendation, the justification of the recommendation and the performance appraisal report, submitted together, is intended to provide a complete picture of the performance of a staff member. This in turn is to inform a decision which that Division, the PAP or the Executive Secretary may have been required to make."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Paragraph 3.2 of Administrative Directive No. 20 (Rev.2)

    Keywords:

    contract; enforcement; non-renewal; organisation's duties; performance report; staff regulations and rules;

    Considerations 11 and 12

    Extract:

    "These facts were significant as they highlight the need for reasons in this case because these circumstances impacted the complainant’s ability to assess whether he should have accepted the offer of the one-year extension of his contract and whether he should challenge the decision.
    It is also significant that the complainant was reminded of the deadline [...], when he had not yet received the explanation. Additionally, it was in the letter [...], which included the explanation, that the Executive Secretary informed the complainant that his contract would expire [...] because he had failed to accept the offer of extension. The Tribunal therefore finds that the decision to offer the one-year extension to the complainant was flawed by the failure of the Administration to provide a timely explanation for that decision."

    Keywords:

    case law; contract; decision; duration of appointment; extension; flaw; notice; offer; termination;

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    breach; contract; decision; discretion; extension; fixed-term; offer; performance report; procedural flaw; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3256


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the fact that he was not promoted in 2006 in accordance with the "age-50 rule", which had been abolished as from 1 January 2005.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    acquired right; promotion;



  • Judgment 3255


    116th Session, 2014
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal allowed the complaint and ordered the cancellation of the competition in which the complainant had applied.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    competition cancelled; patere legem;



  • Judgment 3253


    116th Session, 2014
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns an unfavourable evaluation report. Her internal appeal having wrongly been rejected as irreceivable, the case is referred back to the internal appeal body.

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal has repeatedly emphasised that internal appeals are an important safeguard of staff rights and social harmony (see, for example, Judgment 3184, consideration 15). Also, the internal appeal process is ordinarily an extremely significant element of the entire system of review of administrative decisions affecting the rights of staff employed by organisations which have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal (see, for example, Judgment 3222, consideration 9). Moreover, every official has an interest in the proper establishment of reports on his or her performance on which her or his career may depend (see, for example, Judgment 3241, consideration 5)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3184, 3222, 3241

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; performance report; safeguard;



  • Judgment 3252


    116th Session, 2014
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to extend her fixed-term contract for a period of one year instead of three years on the basis of an adverse evaluation report.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "It is necessary to make clear that the Tribunal’s role is not to adjudicate on the question of whether assessments made in appraisal reports are correct or whether discretionary decisions to employ a staff member on a fixed-term contract for one or three years are correct. Discretionary decisions of these types, involving assessment and evaluation, are entrusted to the responsible officers of the international organisations within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. These types of decisions can only be set aside if they involve some breach of a formal or procedural rule, there is a mistake of fact or law or some material has been overlooked, or a plainly mistaken conclusion has been drawn from the facts, or if there is a misuse of authority (see, for example, Judgment 3006, consideration 7)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3006

    Keywords:

    admissible grounds for review; discretion; disregard of essential fact; fixed-term; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistake of law; performance report; procedural flaw; rating; work appraisal;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "There is a general principle applied by this Tribunal that an organisation cannot base an adverse decision on a staff member’s unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance (see Judgment 2414, consideration 24)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; contract; decision; fixed-term; grounds; patere legem; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3251


    116th Session, 2014
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant's request to be included on the list of eligible candidates for personal promotion was dismissed by the Tribunal.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal is of the opinion that the ILO conducted the 2008 personal promotion exercise in accordance with the applicable rules and procedures. The ILO properly applied the new Office Procedure (No. 125, which took effect from 22 October 2009) to the 2008 personal promotion exercise. [...] Considering that the 2008 promotion exercise was launched after Office Procedure No. 125 took effect, the ILO was correct to follow its provisions for the promotion exercise, and not those of Circular No. 334, Series 6, as the complainant suggests. The complainant did not have any acquired right to the 2008 promotion exercise, promotions being considered “an optional and exceptional discretionary measure which is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal” (see Judgments 2668, under 11, 1500, under 4, 1109, under 4, and 1973, under 5)."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Office Procedure No. 125; Circular No. 334, Series 6
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1109, 1500, 1973, 2668

    Keywords:

    acquired right; condition; discretion; interpretation; judicial review; organisation's duties; personal promotion; provision; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 3250


    116th Session, 2014
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant was recognized as a victim of institutional harassment.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "While the conduct of management which is necessary and reasonable would not constitute harassment, the present case demonstrates how continued mismanagement showing gross negligence on the part of the Organization cannot justify any longer the “managerial need” for the repeated temporary transfers of the complainant which had an ill effect on her. Taken individually, the isolated incidents [...] can perhaps be considered as improper but managerially justified, but taken as a whole the effect is much more damaging to the complainant and can no longer be excused by administrative necessity."

    Keywords:

    appraisal of facts; complaint allowed in part; harassment; injury; negligence; organisation's duties; professional injury; transfer; working conditions;



  • Judgment 3249


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal dismissed the complaint in which the complainant requested the establishment of a new version of his staff report.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    delegated authority; performance report;



  • Judgment 3248


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complaint being almost identical to the previous one and the complainant having no new argument, the Tribunal considered the complaint to be irreceivable under the principle of res judicata.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    performance report; res judicata;



  • Judgment 3247


    116th Session, 2014
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant was on reimbursable loan from UNOPS to the Global Fund, when she was notified of the non-renewal of her contract for unsatisfactory performance.

    Judgment's keywords

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; decision; international civil servant; organisation; receivability; termination;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 | next >


 
Last updated: 26.02.2015 ^ top