TERMS OF APPOINTMENT
You searched for:
Keywords: TERMS OF APPOINTMENT
Total judgments found: 1,647
< 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 | next >
Judgment 3010
111th session, 2011
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
Abolition of post and termination of contract following restructuring / Failure by the Organization to consult the joint advisory body (Appointment and Promotion Board) prior to terminating the complainant's contract .
"[T]he purpose of a provision requiring referral of the proposed termination of a contract to an advisory body is, as stated in Judgment 2352, 'to allow that body to ensure that all the conditions for taking such a step are met, with a view to submitting a recommendation to the executive head'".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2352
Keywords:
advisory body; condition; contract; decision; executive head; provision; purpose; recommendation; termination;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[T]he restructured service is independent of the [Organization], has a new and different focus and has resulted in a significant reduction in cost, all of which make it impossible to accept the complainant's argument that the restructuring was not in the Organization's interest and did not result in budget efficiency. In these circumstances, it is to be concluded that the restructuring was genuine and not simply 'a pretext for dislodging undesirable staff' (see Judgment 1231, under 26)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1231
Keywords:
costs; organisation's interest; reduction; reorganisation; staff reduction;
Judgment 3006
111th session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
Case remitted to the President of the Office for review of the complainant's effective date of promotion on the basis of his amended performance appraisal.
"Assessment of merit is an exercise that involves a value judgement. It is usual to refer to decisions or recommendations involving a value judgement as 'discretionary', signifying that persons may quite reasonably hold different views on the matter in issue and, if the issue involves a comparison with other persons, they may also hold different views on their comparative rating. The nature of a value judgement means that point-to-point comparisons are not necessarily decisive. Moreover, because of the nature of a value judgement, the grounds on which a decision involving a judgement of that kind may be reviewed are limited to those applicable to discretionary decisions. Thus, the Tribunal will only interfere 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; if it was taken in breach of a rule of form or procedure; or if there was an abuse of authority' (see Judgment 2834, under 7)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2834
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistake of law; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; performance report; procedural flaw; rating; work appraisal;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The principle of equality requires that all candidates in a given year be assessed by reference to staff reports for the same period. It is clear from Judgment 2221 that the principle also requires that if the 'merits' of a candidate for promotion are subsequently upgraded, the question of promotion must be considered on the basis of what would have happened if the upgraded marking had been considered previously."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2221
Keywords:
candidate; equal treatment; performance report; promotion; rating; work appraisal;
Judgment 3005
111th session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
Rejection of a request for conversion of a fixed-term appointment to a permanent one.
"In Judgment 1349, under 11, the Tribunal noted the wide discretion an organisation enjoys in relation to the decision to convert a fixed-term appointment to a permanent one. Given the highly discretionary nature of the decision, it is subject to limited review and will only be set aside 'if it is taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it is based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the facts, or if there was an abuse of authority' (see Judgment 2694, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1349, 2694
Keywords:
appointment; contract; decision; discretion; fixed-term; judicial review; permanent;
Consideration 12
Extract:
"[A]s the Tribunal observed in Judgment 782, under 1: 'According to the rules of good faith anyone to whom a promise is made may expect it to be kept, and that means that an international official has the right to fulfilment of a promise by the organisation that employs him. The right is conditional. One condition is that the promise should be substantive, i.e. to act, or not to act, or to allow. Others are that it should come from someone who is competent or deemed competent to make it; that breach should cause injury to him who relies on it; and that the position in law should not have altered between the date of the promise and the date on which fulfilment is due.'"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 782
Keywords:
good faith; organisation's duties; promise; right;
Judgment 3003
111th session, 2011
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 30
Extract:
"To accept that an organisation can be released, through the grant of a stay of execution, from the obligation to execute a judgment unfavourable to itself, on the grounds that it has challenged the validity of the judgment under Article XII of the Statute [of the Tribunal], would not only constitute a major exception to the application of [the] case law but would also, above all, seriously impair the legitimate right of the staff member concerned to benefit from immediate application of the judgment."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article XII of the Statute of the Tribunal
Keywords:
breach; case law; complainant; enforcement; exception; execution; grounds; iloat statute; judgment; organisation's duties; right; right of appeal; suspension;
Considerations 40 and 46
Extract:
Article XII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal, in the version applicable to the international organisations which have accepted the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, provides that: "In any case in which the Executive Board of an international organization which has made the declaration specified in Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute of the Tribunal challenges a decision of the Tribunal confirming its jurisdiction, or considers that a decision of the Tribunal is vitiated by a fundamental fault in the procedure followed, the question of the validity of the decision given by the Tribunal shall be submitted by the Executive Board concerned, for an advisory opinion, to the International Court of Justice."
"[I]t must be emphasised that the question of whether international organisations should be allowed to request a stay of execution of a judgment that they intend to challenge under Article XII of the Statute arises in the context of a procedure which is already fundamentally imbalanced to the detriment of staff members. [T]he option of submitting a request to the Court for an opinion on the basis of that article is confined to the organisations. [...]
Clearly, it is not for the Tribunal to express a critical opinion on a provision of its own Statute. However, it does have to take care, given that this particular provision creates an objective inequality between the parties, to ensure that its own case law does not in any way amplify the consequences of this inequality, which would undeniably occur if requests for a stay of execution submitted by organisations availing themselves of the Article XII procedure were to be considered admissible. To adopt that course would cause serious harm to the legitimate interests of the officials concerned, thereby upsetting the balance between the rights of the organisations and those of their staff members which it is the Tribunal's role to preserve."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article XII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal; Article II, paragraph 5, of the Statute of the Tribunal
Keywords:
advisory opinion; breach; case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; consequence; consultation; date; declaration of recognition; effect; equal treatment; execution; executive body; icj; iloat statute; international civil servant; judgment; judicial review; limits; organisation; procedural flaw; procedure; provision; receivability; request; right; safeguard; staff member's interest; suspension;
Judgment 2997
110th session, 2011
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
Request for the transfer of pension contributions paid into national insurance schemes.
"The Tribunal considers that EMBL fulfilled its duty of care towards its staff by hosting several information sessions, publishing circulars and other documents, and by offering staff members several opportunities to meet with pension experts in order to inform themselves with regard to their pension rights. It is the responsibility of the staff to avail themselves of any information provided and to seek out clarification as needed for their particular situation."
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; pension; pension entitlements; staff member's duties;
Judgment 2996
110th session, 2011
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15 and 16
Extract:
"While generally speaking there is no reason why an advisory body on medical questions should not comprise the same members when it has to give a series of opinions on developments in the condition of the same official, that is not the case where it is required to give a second opinion on the same request of that person, as occurred here. [...] As the Tribunal found in [...] Judgments 179 and 2671, the rule that members of an advisory body must not examine a case on which they have previously expressed a view applies even in the absence of an express text, since its purpose is to protect officials against arbitrary action."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 179, 2671
Keywords:
advisory body; bias; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; composition; exception; international civil servant; medical board; medical opinion; no provision; organisation's duties; purpose; request; safeguard; same;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"While procedural rules and time limits usually apply to the officials of international organisations without it being necessary to recapitulate them when a decision is notified, this is not the case where a rule expressly establishes an obligation to provide this information when notifying a decision [...] and where this formality has not been respected. [...] [T]he principle of good faith requires that an official's complaint will not be deemed irreceivable owing to his or her failure to lodge an internal appeal, if the organisation itself has not abided by the requisite formalities enabling the official to submit an appeal."
Keywords:
complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; direct appeal to tribunal; duty to inform; exception; flaw; general principle; good faith; internal appeal; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; procedure; provision; receivability; staff member's duties; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 2991
110th session, 2011
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"[A]n assessment report can constitute a decision adversely affecting the person concerned and, as such, it may be contested by means of an internal complaint lodged within the time limits established by an organisation's rules and regulations. It may even be impugned in proceedings before the Tribunal after internal means of redress have been exhausted."
Keywords:
applicable law; cause of action; complaint; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; organisation; performance report; time limit; tribunal; written rule;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"It is a general principle of international civil service law that there must be a valid reason for any decision not to renew a fixed-term contract. If the reason given is the unsatisfactory nature of the performance of the staff member concerned, who is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service, the organisation must base its decision on an assessment of that person's work carried out in compliance with previously established rules (see, for example, Judgments 1911, under 6, and 2414, under 23)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1911, 2414
Keywords:
complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; formal requirements; grounds; international civil servant; international civil service principles; non-renewal; organisation's duties; right; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal; written rule;
Judgment 2988
110th session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
Application for execution of Judgment 2786.
"[A]n organisation has a duty to calculate staff salaries and benefits in accordance with its regulations and rules. This applies equally to the calculation of the amount due for salary and benefits pursuant to a judgment of the Tribunal."
Keywords:
allowance; amount; application for execution; execution; judgment; organisation; organisation's duties; payment; salary; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;
Judgment 2986
110th session, 2011
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 26
Extract:
"While the terms of a contract and some decisions will in principle give rise to acquired rights, this is not necessarily true of [the] provisions [of the Staff Regulations and Rules]."
Keywords:
acquired right; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; contract; decision; difference; effect; general principle; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2982
110th session, 2011
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"[The complainant] was replaced virtually immediately even though his contract had somewhat less than two months to run [...] and he had earlier been told that he was to be provided with assistance for the project; he was given no warning of the decision; he was not heard on the question and adequate reasons were not provided. Replacing the complainant in these circumstances constituted '[a]ctions [...] directed at actively damaging [his] personal and/or professional reputation' and, thus, falls within the definition of 'harassment' in General Bulletin No. 1312 of 26 March 2002."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: IOM General Bulletin No. 1312 of 26 March 2002
Keywords:
decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; harassment; moral injury; organisation's duties; professional injury; reassignment; warning;
Consideration 10
Extract:
Replacement of a staff member in circumstances constituting harassment.
"The Tribunal has consistently held [...] 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 2916, under 4). It is also well established that an organisation 'owes it to its employees, especially probationers, to guide them in the performance of their duties and to warn them in specific terms if they are not giving satisfaction and are in risk of dismissal' (see Judgment 2732, under 16)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2732, 2916
Keywords:
decision; organisation's duties; probation; staff assessment; staff regulations and rules; unsatisfactory service; warning; work appraisal;
Judgment 2980
110th session, 2011
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"To add candidates to a shortlist after the evaluation process has begun does not comply with the mandatory fairness and transparency of the recruitment process, and could have a prejudicial effect on the outcome of the process as every evaluation is conditioned by the quantity and quality of candidates to be evaluated. It could also have the effect of appearing to have been done to satisfy improper interests, regardless of whether or not one of the candidates added at a later date eventually succeeds."
Keywords:
candidate; competition; equal treatment; formal flaw; procedural flaw;
Judgment 2978
110th session, 2011
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"[A]ccording to the Tribunal's case law, when the result of a competition is announced and, more broadly when [...] the Administration chooses between candidates, the duty to state the reasons for the choice does not mean that they must be notified at the same time as the decision (see Judgments 1787, under 5, and 2035, under 4). These reasons may be disclosed at a later date, for example in the context of appeal proceedings (see Judgments 1590, under 7, and 2194, under 7)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1590, 1787, 2035, 2194
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; date of notification; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; formal requirements; grounds; same;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"[T]he mere fact that one of the candidates in a competition is temporarily holding the post to be filled does not render the procedure unlawful."
Keywords:
candidate; competition; procedural flaw; provisional measures;
Judgment 2977
110th session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
Non-confirmation of appointment at the end of probation for unsatisfactory performance.
"It is well settled that 'the widest measure of discretion' attends decisions as to the confirmation or otherwise of probationary appointments (see Judgment 1386, under 17). Such decisions are subject to review only on the grounds that 'there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority' (see Judgment 1175, under 5)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1175, 1386
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; appointment; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; fact overlooked; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistake of law; mistaken conclusion; probation; procedural flaw;
Judgment 2976
110th session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"[I]n Judgment 2533 the Tribunal observed that compensation for injury properly included 'past and future adaptations to the complainant's house and car' and that those expenses were 'on no different footing than other necessary expenses incurred as a consequence of [...] service related injury'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2533
Keywords:
compensation; costs; definition; disability benefit; injury; insurance; insurance benefit; service-incurred;
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The purpose of insurance is to indemnify, whether in whole or in part, and not simply to provide a social safety net."
Keywords:
compensation; insurance; insurance benefit; purpose;
Judgment 2975
110th session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"It is well established in the case law that decisions taken in relation to restructuring and the reclassification of posts within an Organization's structure are 'within the discretion of the organisation and may be set aside only on limited grounds [...] for example, if the competent bodies breached procedural rules, or if they acted on some wrong principle, overlooked some material fact or reached a clearly wrong conclusion' (see Judgment 2807, under 5)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2807
Keywords:
admissible grounds for review; case law; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; fact overlooked; mistaken conclusion; organisation; post classification; procedural flaw; reorganisation;
Judgment 2972
110th session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
Existence of an acquired right to work night shifts and to receive the corresponding allowance.
"An acquired right is breached when 'an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations by altering fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on' (see Judgment 2682, under 6)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2682
Keywords:
acceptance; acquired right; amendment; breach; condition; contract; terms of appointment;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"An acquired right may derive 'from the terms of appointment, the staff rules or from a decision' (see Judgment 2696, under 5)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2696
Keywords:
acquired right; decision; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[A]n international organisation 'necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts,[...] and the redeployment of staff' (see Judgment 2510, under 10). The notion of redeployment is apt to include not only assignment to different posts, but also the assignment of new or different shift work patterns."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; assignment; other; post; reorganisation; working conditions; working hours;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Once it is accepted that an organisation has a right to assign new or different shift work patterns, it follows that a particular shift work pattern cannot constitute an acquired right."
Keywords:
acquired right; assignment; organisation; reorganisation; right; working conditions; working hours;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"It was recognised in Judgment 666 that 'an allowance may form an essential part of the official's contract [...] and its abolition would therefore constitute breach of [an] acquired right'. However, it was also said in that case that an official 'has no acquired right to the actual amount of the allowance or to continuance of any particular method of reckoning it. Indeed, he must expect these to change as circumstances change'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 666
Keywords:
acquired right; allowance; amount; contract; night differential; payment; terms of appointment;
Judgment 2963
110th session, 2011
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"[A] decision to terminate a staff member's service retrospectively involves necessarily a detriment in that it negates the possibility of notice allowing for the person concerned to make necessary arrangements during the notice period. This is so whether or not a payment is made in lieu of notice."
Keywords:
decision; injury; non-retroactivity; notice; payment; staff member's interest;
Consideration 8
Extract:
Quashing of a retroactive termination of appointment for reasons of health.
"It is well settled that an international organisation cannot retrospectively alter the rights and obligations of staff members to their detriment, whether by written rule or otherwise (see, for example, Judgments 595, under 5 and 6, 1669, under 17 and 18, and 1979, under 5(h))."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 595, 1669, 1979
Keywords:
amendment; non-retroactivity; right; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; written rule;
Judgment 2962
110th session, 2011
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"According to firm precedent, every international civil servant may be expected to know the rules and regulations to which he is subject."
Keywords:
case law; provision; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2959
110th session, 2011
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[T]he expression 'so far as practicable' cannot be interpreted to mean that for certain specific posts a competitive selection process can automatically be considered as not practicable (ubi lex voluit dixit, ubi noluit tacuit)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2620
Keywords:
appointment; competition; interpretation; post; provision;
Consideration 3
Extract:
Quashing of a direct appointment to the post of Chief of Cabinet.
"[T]he rights of employees of international organisations to impugn decisions regarding appointments do not depend on their chances of successful appointment (see Judgments 1549, under 9, and 1272, under 12)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1272, 1549
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; cause of action; decision; right; right of appeal; status of complainant;
Judgment 2955
110th session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The defendant asks the Tribunal to find that, especially in his rejoinder, the complainant engaged in 'completely gratuitous and misplaced [...] personal attacks'. It asks the Tribunal 'to censure such inappropriate language which detracts from the proper conduct of the proceedings'.
The complainant, who is not assisted by a lawyer, has certainly used, in his complaint and rejoinder, blunt, colourful language which is not always very courteous. However, this wording does not exceed the bounds of what is acceptable in the context of legal proceedings."
Keywords:
claim; complaint; lack of injury; limits; organisation; procedure; refusal; rejoinder; respect for dignity; staff member's duties; tribunal;
< 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 | next >
|
