APPOINTMENT

You searched for:
Keywords: APPOINTMENT
Total judgments found: 507

< 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 | next >

• Judgment 1808

  
  86th session, 1999
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 7

  Extract:

  "GRADING TURNS ON THE DUTIES OF THE POST, NOT ON THE QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE. NOR DO THE MASTER STANDARD FOR CLASSIFICATION OF PROFESSIONAL POSTS AND THE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES OF THE PROFESSIONAL GRADING APPEALS COMMITTEE LAY ANY DUTY ON THE [ORGANIZATION] TO MAKE AVAILABLE AN OFFICIAL'S PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF A GRADING EXERCISE".

  Keywords:

  criteria; grade; icsc decision; organisation's duties; performance report; post; post classification; post held by complainant; professional category; work appraisal;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1807

  
  86th session, 1999
  European Southern Observatory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 8

  Extract:

  THE ORGANISATION SUBMITS THAT THE CONTRACT SIGNED BY THE COMPLAINANT WAS A NEW CONTRACT, NOT AN EXTENSION OF THE OLD ONE, SINCE HIS STATUS HAD SHIFTED FROM "PAID ASSOCIATE" TO "INTERNATIONAL STAFF MEMBER". SO HE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE PROTECTION OF ACQUIRED RIGHTS BESTOWED BY AN INTERNAL MEMORANDUM. ACCORDING TO THE TRIBUNAL, "THE CONTRACT WHICH [THE COMPLAINANT] WAS OFFERED [...] AND WHICH HE SIGNED [IN OCTOBER 1995] WAS NOT HIS FIRST FIXED-TERM CONTRACT, SINCE HE HAD BEGUN AT THE [ORGANISATION] IN 1991 UNDER A FIXED-TERM ONE THAT IT HAD RENEWED MORE THAN ONCE. NOR WAS IT A NEW, INDEFINITE CONTRACT, SINCE [...] HIS LAST CONTRACT WAS A FIXED-TERM ONE FOR THREE YEARS. UNDER HIS EARLIER CONTRACTS HE WAS A STAFF MEMBER".

  Keywords:

  acquired right; complaint allowed; contract; extension; fixed-term; international civil servant; permanent; successive contracts;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1806

  
  86th session, 1999
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATIONS 15, 16 AND 17

  Extract:

  THE TRIBUNAL DOES NOT SUPPORT THE PRACTICE OF THE ORGANIZATION OF NOT LETTING EMPLOYEES IN THE PERSONNEL UNIT HOLD OFFICE ON THE STAFF COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO AVOID ANY RISK OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THE DECISION TO OFFER THE COMPLAINANT A POST IN THE PERSONNEL UNIT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ATTACHED TO THE CONDITION OF RESIGNING AS PRESIDENT OF THE STAFF ASSOCIATION. "IT IS IMPORTANT BOTH TO PROTECT THE RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION AND TO MAINTAIN A STAFF ASSOCIATION'S INDEPENDENCE."

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed in part; condition; freedom of association; offer; organisation's duties; post; practice; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1804

  
  86th session, 1999
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATIONS 12, 13 AND 14

  Extract:

  THE PROMOTION OF MR [C.], PRESENTED AS THE FULFILMENT OF A PROMISE MADE TO HIM ON RECRUITMENT, GAVE RISE TO A DECISION ADOPTED ON 7 DECEMBER 1994. "ONLY THAT DECISION WAS NOTIFIED TO THE STAFF. SO THE COMPLAINANTS, WHO WERE UNAWARE OF THE PROMISE, WERE IN GOOD FAITH IN CHALLENGING THE PROMOTION ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT WAS IN BREACH OF THE RULE IT ACTUALLY CITED. SO THEY WERE RIGHT IN SAYING THAT MR [C.] HAD BEEN PROMOTED TO A4 EVEN THOUGH HE DID NOT FULLY QUALIFY UNDER THE [RELEVANT] RULES [...] BECAUSE OF THE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH MR [C.] WAS PROMOTED THE COMPLAINANTS WERE ALSO RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THE DECISION: THE [ORGANIZATION] HAD ON THE FACE OF IT FAILED TO OBSERVE THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL TREATMENT BECAUSE IN PROMOTING MR [C.] IT DID NOT ABIDE BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SERVICE REGULATIONS OR BY THE CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO WHICH THE COMPLAINANTS WERE THEMSELVES SUBJECT. THE CONCLUSION IS THAT THE COMPLAINANTS DID SUFFER MORAL INJURY AND EACH OF THEM IS ENTITLED UNDER THAT HEAD TO AN AWARD OF".

  Keywords:

  appointment; breach; cause of action; complaint allowed in part; condition; damages; decision; equal treatment; general principle; good faith; grade; injury; moral injury; promise; promotion; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1797

  
  86th session, 1999
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATIONS 12 AND 13

  Extract:

  "THE ORGANIZATION PLEADS THAT IT IS UNDER NO DUTY TO PAY CONTRIBUTIONS FOR [THE COMPLAINANT] TO THE PENSION FUND OR TO THE STAFF HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN AND WOULD HAVE HAD SUCH DUTY ONLY IF HE HAD BEEN REINSTATED... THE TRIBUNAL RULED ON A SIMILAR ISSUE IN JUDGMENT 1338 [...] IN WHICH IT HELD THAT ITS AWARD ... OF DAMAGES EQUIVALENT TO 'THE AMOUNT OF THE SALARY, ALLOWANCES AND OTHER ENTITLEMENTS [THE COMPLAINANT] WOULD HAVE RECEIVED' HAD NOT REQUIRED REINSTATEMENT IN THE PENSION FUND OR HEALTH INSURANCE."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1338
  

  Keywords:

  allowance; application for execution; case law; contributions; enforcement; insurance; judgment; organisation's duties; reinstatement; salary; social benefit; unjspf;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1793

  
  86th session, 1999
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 6

  Extract:

  "POSTS UNDER FIELD PROJECTS WILL AS A RULE FARE AS DO THE PROJECTS THEMSELVES. IF THE PROJECT IS OF LIMITED DURATION, SO TOO WILL BE THE POST."

  Keywords:

  fixed-term; post; project personnel;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1789

  
  86th session, 1999
  European Southern Observatory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 8

  Extract:

  "[THE ORGANISATION] REJECTED [THE COMPLAINANT'S APPLICATION] ON THE GROUNDS THAT HE WAS OVERQUALIFIED [FOR THE JOB PUT UP FOR COMPETITION]. SUCH GROUNDS ARE WRONG IN LAW. YET THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES ON WHICH THE [ORGANISATION] REJECTED THE COMPLAINANT, PURPORTING TO ACT UNDER R II 1.03 [OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS]. IT THEREBY DENIED THE COMPLAINANT HIS RIGHT TO APPLY AND TO HAVE HIS APPLICATION PROPERLY CONSIDERED. THERE WAS BREACH OF EQUAL TREATMENT."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R II 1.03 STAFF REGULATIONS
  
  

  Keywords:

  breach; candidate; competition; complaint allowed; criteria; discretion; equal treatment; flaw; grounds; mistake of law; procedure; rejected permanently; right; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1787

  
  86th session, 1999
  International Organization for Migration
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATIONS 10 AND 11

  Extract:

  "THE QUALIFICATIONS EXPECTED MAY BE JUST 'DESIRABLE', NOT REQUIREMENTS BINDING IN LAW. BUT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY IS NOT FREE ON THAT ACCOUNT [...] TO DISREGARD THE FACT THAT SOME DO QUALIFY AND TO PLUMP FOR THE VERY ONE WHO DOES NOT, EVEN ONE WHO IN OTHER RESPECTS HAS THE RIGHT EXPERIENCE AND SKILLS. [...] HERE THE ORGANIZATION PICKED SOMEONE WANTING IN LISTED QUALIFICATIONS WHICH, THOUGH SAID TO BE ONLY 'DESIRABLE', WERE IN FACT ESSENTIAL. IT THEREBY FELL SHORT OF THE STANDARDS OF OBJECTIVENESS AND OPENNESS THAT MUST GOVERN APPOINTMENT TO A SENIOR POST IN AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION. THE PROCESS OF SELECTION CANNOT STAND [...]" (SEE JUDGMENT 1595, CONSID. 10).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1595
  

  Keywords:

  appointment; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; complaint allowed; condition; criteria; discretion; flaw; post; post description; procedure; professional experience; qualifications; vacancy notice;
  

  CONSIDERATION 4

  Extract:

  "ALTHOUGH THE ABOLITION OF HIS POST DID DEMAND OF THE ORGANIZATION EFFORTS TO PLACE HIM SUITABLY AND AT THE RIGHT GRADE ELSEWHERE, HE HAD NO RIGHT TO PREFERENCE FOR ANY PARTICULAR POST, THE LESS SO SINCE OTHERS WERE IN THE SAME PLIGHT. HE MAY OBJECT TO THE ORGANIZATION'S FAILURE TO LET HIM HAVE THE TRANSFER HE WANTED, BUT SUCH FAILURE DOES NOT MAKE IT UNLAWFUL FOR THE ORGANIZATION TO HAVE APPOINTED ANOTHER OFFICIAL TO THE POST HE HAD APPLIED FOR, PROVIDED AT LEAST THAT THAT OFFICIAL WAS QUALIFIED."

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; appointment; competition; complaint allowed; condition; equal treatment; grade; organisation's duties; post; priority; qualifications; reassignment; right;
  

  CONSIDERATION 5

  Extract:

  "WHEN A DECISION IS ADVERSE TO A STAFF MEMBER THE COMPETENT ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY DOES HAVE TO REVEAL THE REASONS FOR IT. BUT WHEN THE RESULT OF A COMPETITION IS ANNOUNCED AND, MORE BROADLY, WHEN A CHOICE IS MADE BETWEEN CANDIDATES THE REASONS FOR THE CHOICE NEED NOT BE NOTIFIED AT THE SAME TIME AS THE DECISION."

  Keywords:

  candidate; competition; complaint allowed; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; procedure; time limit;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1783

  
  85th session, 1998
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 4

  Extract:

  "WHEN THE TRIBUNAL QUASHES A FLAWED DECISION NOT TO RENEW A FIXED-TERM APPOINTMENT IT HAS DISCRETION AS TO THE RELIEF IT GRANTS. IT MAY SEND THE CASE BACK FOR A NEW DECISION BY THE ORGANISATION ON RENEWAL [...] BUT IF IT CONSIDERS THAT RENEWAL WOULD BE ONLY FAIR, IT WILL, INSTEAD OF ORDERING A NEW DECISION, ACTUALLY ORDER REINSTATEMENT UNDER A NEW CONTRACT FOR AN APPROPRIATE TERM. [...] BUT IF IT CONSIDERS NEITHER A NEW DECISION NOR REINSTATEMENT TO BE POSSIBLE OR ADVISABLE, IT MAY, AS AUTHORISED BY ARTICLE VIII OF ITS STATUTE, AWARD THE COMPLAINANT COMPENSATION."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII ILOAT STATUTE
  
  

  Keywords:

  allowance; application for execution; case sent back to organisation; compensation; contract; decision quashed; duration of appointment; effect; fixed-term; iloat statute; judgment; non-renewal; reinstatement; subsidiary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1782

  
  85th session, 1998
  United Nations Industrial Development Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 11

  Extract:

  "WHAT [STAFF RULE 110.02 A) ON ABOLITION OF POSTS AND STAFF REDUCTION] ENTITLES STAFF MEMBERS WITH PERMANENT APPOINTMENTS TO IS PREFERENCE TO 'SUITABLE POSTS IN WHICH THEIR SERVICES CAN BE EFFECTIVELY UTILIZED', AND THAT MEANS POSTS NOT JUST AT THE SAME GRADE BUT EVEN AT A LOWER ONE. [...] THE ADVISORY GROUP SHOULD HAVE ASKED THE COMPLAINANT [WHO HELD GRADE G.7] AT THE OUTSET WHETHER SHE WOULD ACCEPT A G.6 POST. BECAUSE IT FAILED TO DO SO, IT CONSIDERED HER FOR VACANT POSTS AT G.7 ONLY AND DEPRIVED HER OF THE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING CONSIDERED FOR G.6 VACANCIES." SEE ALSO JUDGMENT 346 [...].

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: UNIDO'S STAFF RULE 110.02 A)
  ILOAT Judgment(s): 346
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; decision quashed; duration of appointment; grade; organisation's duties; permanent; post; priority; reinstatement; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1775

  
  85th session, 1998
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 10

  Extract:

  "STAFF RULE 1050.2, WHICH [THE COMPLAINANT] RELIES ON, STATES THAT [THE REDUCTION-IN-FORCE PROCEDURE] APPLIES ONLY TO A POST OF INDEFINITE DURATION'. THE POST HELD BY THE COMPLAINANT [...] WAS DESIGNATED AS A PROJECT POST'. AS MANUAL PARAGRAPH II.9.260 MAKES PLAIN, THE REDUCTION-IN-FORCE PROCEDURE DOES NOT APPLY TO POSTS OF LIMITED DURATION', A CATEGORY WHICH SPECIFICALLY INCLUDES COUNTRY PROJECT POSTS."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1050.2 DU REGLEMENT DU PERSONNEL DE L'OMS PARAGRAPHE II.9.260 DU MANUEL DE L'OMS
  
  

  Keywords:

  criteria; enforcement; fixed-term; permanent; post; project personnel; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1771

  
  85th session, 1998
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 2 (C)

  Extract:

  "THE COMPLAINANT APPLIES FOR AN EXPERT ENQUIRY TO DETERMINE WHETHER SHE IS FIT FOR THE DUTIES OF THE POST. FIRM PRECEDENT HAS IT THAT AN EXECUTIVE HEAD MUST BE ALLOWED DISCRETION TO DETERMINE WHAT SERVICES THE ORGANISATION NEEDS AND WHETHER SOMEONE IS ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM, AND THAT THE TRIBUNAL MAY EXERCISE ONLY A LIMITED POWER OF REVIEW OVER DECISIONS ON SUCH MATTERS. TO ALLOW THE COMPLAINANT'S APPLICATION FOR EXPERT INQUIRY WOULD BE TO ASSUME THAT THE TRIBUNAL MIGHT REPLACE THE DIRECTOR GENERAL'S ASSESSMENT OF HER WITH ITS OWN AND WOULD BE ALIEN TO THE NOTION OF LIMITED REVIEW".

  Keywords:

  case law; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; discretion; executive head; expert inquiry; judicial review; qualifications; refusal;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1767

  
  85th session, 1998
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATIONS 12 AND 13

  Extract:

  THE TEXTS PROVIDE THAT ONE MEMBER OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE "MUST BE THE STAFF ASSOCIATION'S PRESIDENT OR HIS NOMINEE'. [...] HERE THE STAFF ASSOCIATION REFUSED TO TAKE PART IN THE SELECTION. ALTHOUGH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSOCIATION IS FREE TO TAKE PART, HIS REFUSAL TO DO SO CANNOT MAKE THE COMMITTEE'S CHOICE VOID. IF THAT WERE SO, THE STAFF ASSOCIATION'S REPRESENTATIVE WOULD HAVE A VETO".

  Keywords:

  consequence; participation; refusal; right; selection board; staff representative; staff union;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1733

  
  84th session, 1998
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 14

  Extract:

  THE AUTHORITIES OF THE COMPLAINANT'S HOME COUNTRY, WHO WERE ASKED TO GIVE AN OPINION ABOUT GIVING HIM A PROMOTION, DECLINED THEIR SUPPORT FOR HIM BUT GAVE NO REASONS. IF THE COUNTRY "HAD GIVEN A REASON THE DIRECTOR GENERAL WOULD HAVE HAD TO CONSIDER WHETHER IT WAS SOUND OR NOT AND WHETHER REFUSING HIM THE APPOINTMENT WAS IN THE AGENCY'S BEST INTERESTS. SINCE IT OFFERED NONE, HE HAD NO BASIS ON WHICH TO EXERCISE HIS DISCRETION. THE COMPLAINANT WAS FULLY QUALIFIED FOR PROMOTION; HIS ABILITIES WERE WELL KNOWN TO THE AGENCY AND APPRECIATED. THE PARAMOUNT CONSIDERATION MENTIONED IN ARTICLE VII.D [OF THE IAEA STAFF REGULATIONS] WAS HEEDED, NAMELY SEEKING STAFF OF THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF EFFICIENCY, TECHNICAL COMPETENCE AND INTEGRITY. THE REASON STATED BY THE AGENCY FOR REFUSING HIM THE APPOINTMENT WHICH HE WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN GRANTED IS THEREFORE UNTENABLE AND ACTING FROM THAT REASON AMOUNTED TO A MISTAKE IN LAW."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: ARTICLE VII.D IAEA STAFF REGULATIONS
  
  

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; discretion; independence; member state; mistake of law; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; promotion; qualifications; staff regulations and rules;
  

  CONSIDERATIONS 16 AND 17

  Extract:

  "IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND STAFF MAY NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE INSTRUCTIONS FROM ANY SOURCE EXTERNAL TO THE AGENCY. FOR THE DIRECTOR GENERAL TO ALLOW A MEMBER STATE A VETO ON THE APPOINTMENT OF A STAFF MEMBER IS TO 'RECEIVE INSTRUCTIONS' FROM AN EXTERNAL SOURCE AND AN INTERFERENCE WITH THE PARAMOUNT CONSIDERATION OF SECURING STAFF OF THE RIGHT CALIBRE. PARAGRAPH 68 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL AND THE SENTENCE 'ACCORDINGLY GOVERNMENT SPONSORSHIP WILL BE REQUIRED' [...] ARE NULL AND VOID AS BEING CONTRARY TO [...] THE STATUTE."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: PARAGRAPH 68 OF IAEA'S MANUAL
  
  

  Keywords:

  appointment; complaint allowed; decision quashed; independence; member state; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1730

  
  84th session, 1998
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 14

  Extract:

  "LIKE ANY OTHER ORGANISATION IN THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM, THE FAO HAS A DUTY TO ENSURE THAT ITS STAFF ATTAIN THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF EFFICIENCY AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE. THE ARRANGEMENTS MADE WITH THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT UP TO 1992 PREVENTED THE ORGANIZATION FROM EXERCISING ITS OWN DISCRETION ABOUT THE LEVEL OF COMPETENCE OF CHINESE RECRUITS. THE FACT THAT THE ARRANGEMENTS HAVE CEASED IS TO BE WELCOMED AND ANY SURVIVING ANOMALIES SHOULD BE CORRECTED, NOT PERPETUATED."

  Keywords:

  appointment; discretion; flaw; independence; organisation; procedure;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1728

  
  84th session, 1998
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 16

  Extract:

  "AS FOR THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD BEFORE TERMINATION, IT MUST OF COURSE BE RESPECTED WHERE THERE IS A PROPOSAL TO TERMINATE AN APPOINTMENT FOR DISCIPLINARY REASONS OR FOR UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE. A REDUCTION-IN-FORCE COMMITTEE DOES NOT, HOWEVER, MAKE FINDINGS OF THAT KIND BUT PERFORMS VERY DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS. THAT IS CLEAR FROM MANUAL PARAGRAPH II.9.340.3, WHICH REQUIRES ASSESSMENT 'ESSENTIALLY' ON THE BASIS OF APPRAISAL REPORTS AND OTHER WRITTEN RECORDS OF PERFORMANCE AND SERVICE."

  Keywords:

  complainant; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; confidential evidence; duty to inform; internal appeals body; limits; organisation's duties; personal file; selection board;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1706

  
  84th session, 1998
  United Nations Industrial Development Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 16

  Extract:

  THE COMPLAINANT, PLACED ON SPECIAL LEAVE WITHOUT PAY FOLLOWING AN 'AGREED TERMINATION' WAS A CANDIDATE IN AN INTERNAL COMPETITION. THE ORGANIZATION MAINTAINS THAT SHE WAS NO LONGER A STAFF MEMBER AT THE MOMENT OF RECRUITMENT. "THE TRIBUNAL [...] HOLDS THAT THE 'AGREED TERMINATION' DID NOT IN ANY WAY RESTRICT HER RIGHTS UNDER THE STAFF RULES, WHILE SHE REMAINED A STAFF MEMBER, TO PREFERENCE OVER AN OUTSIDE MALE CANDIDATE IN ANY FUTURE COMPETITION WHERE QUALIFICATIONS WERE EQUAL."

  Keywords:

  agreed termination; appointment; candidate; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; internal candidate; priority; right; sex discrimination; special leave; staff regulations and rules; unpaid leave;
  

  CONSIDERATION 15

  Extract:

  "UNIDO'S PROFESSED POLICY OF INCREASING THE NUMBER OF WOMEN STAFF AT ALL LEVELS REQUIRED AT LEAST THAT, OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, IT SHOULD GIVE PREFERENCE TO APPLICATIONS FROM WOMEN; INDEED ENCOURAGING WOMEN TO APPLY WAS CONSISTENT ONLY WITH THEIR RIGHT TO SUCH PREFERENCE."

  Keywords:

  candidate; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; priority; right; sex discrimination;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1698

  
  84th session, 1998
  Pan American Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 10

  Extract:

  THE TRIBUNAL NOTES "THAT A VACANCY NOTICE [...] IS NECESSARILY A DOCUMENT WHOSE VALIDITY IS LIMITED IN TIME BY THE CLOSING DATE OF THE PARTICULAR COMPETITION WHICH IT ANNOUNCES. [...] THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANY POST MAY OF COURSE CHANGE OVER TIME."

  Keywords:

  competition; condition; limits; vacancy; vacancy notice;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1696

  
  84th session, 1998
  World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 5

  Extract:

  "THE WORDING OF REGULATION 9 (B) (3) IS PLAIN: THE DECISION TO TERMINATE AN APPOINTMENT AT THE END OF PROBATION MAY BE TAKEN ONLY 'AFTER CONSULTATION WITH AN ADVISORY BODY', THE STAFF COMMITTEE." THE ORGANISATION SUBMITS THAT IT NEED ONLY SPEAK TO THE CHAIRMAN. BUT THE COMMITTEE HAS SEVERAL MEMBERS WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO FUNCTION AS A SINGLE BODY. THE ORGNANISATION'S ARGUMENT POSTULATES PRIOR DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO THE COMMITTEE'S CHAIRMAN OR OFFICERS. TO BE VALID, HOWEVER, SUCH DELEGATION MUST HAVE SOME BASIS IN THE RULES. FAILING THAT, ANY ACTION "WILL BE ULTRA VIRES" THERE BEING WRONGFUL FAILURE TO CONSULT THE STAFF COMMITTEE, THE IMPUGNED DECISION MUST, IN LINE WITH PATERE LEGEM, BE SET ASIDE.

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: CCC STAFF REGULATIONS 9(B)(3)
  
  

  Keywords:

  advisory body; advisory opinion; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; decision quashed; delegated authority; due process; organisation's duties; patere legem; probation; procedural flaw; staff regulations and rules; termination;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1689

  
  84th session, 1998
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  CONSIDERATION 8

  Extract:

  "THE AGENCY REPLIES THAT [...] WHERE CANDIDATES ARE FOUND SUITABLE AND PUT ON A PAR NO EXPLANATION IS CALLED FOR, THOUGH 'A REASONED REPORT WOULD HAVE MADE SENSE HAD THE BOARD PUT THE TWO CANDIDATES IN ORDER OF PREFERENCE'. THE PLEA IS UNSOUND. IT POSTULATES THAT THE COMPLAINANT WAS UNAFFECTED BY THE FINDING THAT HE WAS AS FIT FOR THE POST AS THE OTHER CANDIDATE, AND IN ANY EVENT OVERLOOKS THE FACT THAT THE CANDIDATES ARE IN COMPETITION. [...]. IF TWO ARE RANKED EX AEQUO EACH MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN CONTENDING THAT THE OTHER SHOULD HAVE BEEN MARKED LOWER. [...]. IN ANY EVENT THE FINAL RANKING [...] MUST BE ACCOUNTED FOR."

  Keywords:

  candidate; case sent back to organisation; cause of action; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; duty to substantiate decision; selection board;
  

< 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 | next >