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

Misconduct (392, 393, 394, 652,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Misconduct
Total judgments found: 130

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >

  • Judgment 4247


    129th Session, 2020
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges her dismissal from service for serious misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 4237


    129th Session, 2020
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision – taken after his resignation – to find him guilty of serious misconduct, and the decision to withhold from his separation entitlements an amount corresponding to financial losses allegedly incurred by WHO as a result of his misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct;



  • Judgment 4227


    129th Session, 2020
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary procedure; misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 4222


    129th Session, 2020
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal of UNESCO to award full compensation for the injury suffered as a result of an accident recognized as being service-incurred.

    Considerations 15-17

    Extract:

    According to article 4 of the Staff Compensation Plan:
    “The compensation payable under these Rules shall be the sole compensation to which any person shall be entitled as against the Organization in respect of any claim falling within the provisions thereof”.
    Contrary to the defendant organization’s submissions, these provisions do not preclude a staff member from claiming compensation for the consequences of negligence on the part of the Organization. Such a claim cannot be regarded as being based on the provisions of this plan (see, for similar cases, Judgments 3689, consideration 5, and 3946, consideration 17).
    [...]
    According to the Tribunal’s case law, an organization may incur liability in negligence where it fails to take reasonable steps to prevent a foreseeable risk of injury (see Judgments 2804, consideration 25, 3215, consideration 12, and 3733, consideration 12). In the instant case, it is apparent from the file that the floor of the podium set up for the seminar was defective and should have been repaired or, at least, signposted, as evidenced by the occurrence of the accident.[...]
    According to the Tribunal’s case law, an international organization has a duty to provide a safe and adequate environment for its staff, and they in turn have the right to insist on appropriate measures to protect their health and safety (see Judgments 3025, consideration 2, 2403, consideration 16, and 3689, consideration 5).
    In the instant case, the Organization, which had ordered the construction of the podium in which the hole was found, should have ensured that this work was properly carried out. It must therefore be recognized that the Organization is at fault.
    Pursuant to the principle that full compensation is due in respect of injuries caused by negligence on the part of the Administration, the complainant is entitled to compensation for injuries not already compensated under the Staff Compensation Plan.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2403, 2804, 3025, 3215, 3689, 3689, 3733, 3946

    Keywords:

    allowance; compensation; construction work; misconduct; negligence; professional accident;



  • Judgment 4207


    129th Session, 2020
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the Director General’s decision to endorse the conclusion of the Office of Internal Oversight Services that it was unable to make a conclusive determination on her sexual harassment claim and to reject her related request for damages.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    A claim of harassment and a report of misconduct based on an allegation of harassment are distinct and separate matters. A claim of harassment is a claim addressed to the organization the resolution of which only involves two parties, the organization and the reporter of the harassment. In contrast, a report of alleged misconduct, based on an allegation of harassment, triggers the Appendix G procedures, a process that is directed at the culpability of the staff member in question and potentially the imposition of a disciplinary measure. In this process, the two parties are the organization and the staff member in question. In this process, the reporter of the misconduct, a potential victim of the harassment, is a witness and not a party in the proceedings.

    Keywords:

    disciplinary procedure; harassment; misconduct; sexual harassment;

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    The Tribunal concludes that the IAEA could have and should have given the complainant a decision regarding her complaint of harassment within a reasonable time following the completion of the investigation [...]. Rather than reacting promptly in relation to the complainant’s claim of harassment, the Administration held this claim in abeyance pending the completion of the Appendix G procedure and a determination as to whether misconduct was committed. The fact that the Appendix G procedures were still ongoing did not in any way preclude the IAEA from responding to the complainant’s claim of harassment.

    Keywords:

    harassment; inquiry; misconduct; reasonable time; sexual harassment;



  • Judgment 4106


    127th Session, 2019
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to apply to him the sanction of discharge.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 4077


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU applies for interpretation and review of Judgment 3928 alleging errors of fact, inter alia, and asserts that it is impossible to give effect to the Tribunal’s order to reinstate the complainant. The complainant applies for execution of Judgment 3928.

    Consideration 25

    Extract:

    [T]he [organization] could not refer to the complainant’s alleged misconduct as a reason not to reinstate him as no disciplinary proceeding has occurred in that regard, so misconduct has never been proven. It is all the more grave when considering that the alleged reason for the abolition of the posts was because of financial constraints. The abolition of a post can never be based on a staff member’s conduct, as that would constitute a hidden sanction. The [organization]’s presentation before the Council of Administration constituted a breach of the duty of care and of the adversarial principle, as the complainant was not given any opportunity to defend himself and his reputation from the allegations. The UPU must respect the dignity of its staff and preserve their reputation.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; adversarial proceedings; budgetary reasons; due process; duty of care; hidden disciplinary measure; misconduct; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 4065


    127th Session, 2019
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: In his second complaint, the complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him, while he was on sick leave, for misconduct. In his third complaint, he challenges the dismissal decision on the merits.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; sick leave; termination;



  • Judgment 4063


    127th Session, 2019
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment on disciplinary grounds.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 4058


    127th Session, 2019
    World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his fixed-term appointment for serious misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary procedure; misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 4051


    126th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 4050


    126th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on him the disciplinary sanction of relegation in step.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; misconduct;



  • Judgment 4043


    126th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    As a general proposition, a provision of a staff rule or regulation founding a charge of misconduct should not be widely or liberally construed so as to capture conduct potentially at the very margins of the conduct proscribed by the rule or regulation. It should be construed only to capture conduct clearly within the boundaries of the rule or regulation.

    Keywords:

    misconduct;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; staff representative; termination;



  • Judgment 4042


    126th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to downgrade her for misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    downgrading; misconduct; staff representative;

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    As a general proposition, a provision of a staff rule or regulation founding a charge of misconduct should not be widely or liberally construed so as to capture conduct potentially at the very margins of the conduct proscribed by the rule or regulation.

    Keywords:

    misconduct;



  • Judgment 4011


    126th Session, 2018
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her for misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    misconduct; termination;



  • Judgment 3972


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to impose upon him the disciplinary measure of dismissal for misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; misconduct;



  • Judgment 3969


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the EPO’s decision to impose upon her the disciplinary measure of downgrading.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; downgrading; misconduct;



  • Judgment 3968


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on her the disciplinary measure of downgrading for serious misconduct, and the decision not to initiate an investigation into her allegations of institutional harassment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; downgrading; misconduct; staff representative;

    Considerations 26 and 27

    Extract:

    The Tribunal concludes the complainant acted carelessly, with regard to a very sensitive subject, conscious of the probability that her statement would highly offend other staff members and would create great unrest among colleagues, damaging the work environment. The Tribunal observes the complainant’s actions were serious and wrong and cannot be justified by an alleged good purpose.
    [T]aking into account the discretion enjoyed by the disciplinary authority and, in particular, the complainant’s refusal to apologize to Mr A. and the serious consequences of that behaviour on Mr A.’s health, the Tribunal finds that the contested disciplinary measure is not disproportionate and that the complainant’s twentieth complaint must also be dismissed (see Judgment 3640, under 29).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3640

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; misconduct; proportionality;



  • Judgment 3964


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of dismissal for serious misconduct.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The overarching legal principles in a case such as the present have recently been discussed by the Tribunal in Judgment 3862, consideration 20. The Tribunal observed: “the executive head of an international organisation is not bound to follow the recommendation of any internal appeal body nor bound to adopt the reasoning of that body. However an executive head who departs from a recommendation of such a body must state the reasons for disregarding it and must motivate the decision actually reached. In addition, according to the well-settled case law of the Tribunal, the burden of proof rests on an organisation to prove allegations of misconduct beyond a reasonable doubt before a disciplinary sanction can be imposed (see, for example, Judgment 3649, consideration 14).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3649, 3862

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; disciplinary measure; duty to substantiate decision; final decision; misconduct; standard of proof;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    It is [...] well settled that the ‘Tribunal will not engage in a determination as to whether the burden of proof has been met, instead, the Tribunal will review the evidence to determine whether a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt could properly have been made by the primary trier of fact’ (see Judgment 2699, consideration 9).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2699

    Keywords:

    misconduct; standard of proof;

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    In cases of found misconduct based on allegations of fraud resulting in dismissal, the Tribunal has adopted the approach, in order to determine whether a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt could have been made, that it “will not require absolute proof, which is almost impossible to provide on such a matter [involving allegations of fraud or similar conduct]. It will dismiss the complaint if there is a set of precise and concurring presumptions of the complainant’s guilt” (Judgment 3297, consideration 8, and, also more recently, Judgment 3757, consideration 6).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3297, 3757

    Keywords:

    fraud; misconduct; standard of proof; termination;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    [I]t is not for the Tribunal to assume the role of fact finder and determine, itself, whether the case is made out that the complainant was guilty of the misconduct alleged. Rather the Tribunal will review the evidence to determine whether “a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt could properly have been made by the primary trier of fact”, in this case the President.

    Keywords:

    judicial review; misconduct; standard of proof;



  • Judgment 3888


    124th Session, 2017
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her with immediate effect for misconduct.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    disciplinary procedure; misconduct;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >


 
Last updated: 17.02.2020 ^ top