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

Medical opinion (417,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Medical opinion
Total judgments found: 29

1, 2 | next >

  • Judgment 4117


    127th Session, 2019
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the finding that his invalidity was not caused by an occupational disease.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    Before proceeding to consider the merits of the complaint, one further preliminary issue concerning receivability should be mentioned. There is one judgment of the Tribunal, Judgment 2787, which, in consideration 3, draws a distinction between procedural and medical aspects of a Medical Committee’s opinion and affirms that, by implication and because of Articles 107(1) and (2) and 109(3) of the Service Regulations as applicable at the material time, the latter (the medical aspects) could be challenged before the Tribunal without the prior filing of an internal appeal to the Appeals Committee. Even if the distinction created by this judgment should continue to be applied by the Tribunal (which may be doubted), there is no bright line between an opinion of a Medical Committee on procedural aspects and an opinion on medical aspects. The present case illustrates that an opinion of the Medical Committee may have both procedural and medical characteristics. In the present case, the Tribunal is satisfied that the decisions of 7 January and 13 February 2013 were decisions “taken after consultation of the Medical Committee” for the purposes of Articles 109(3)(a) and 110(2)(a) of the Service Regulations. Accordingly, the complainant was entitled to bring his complaint directly to the Tribunal [...].

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2787

    Keywords:

    internal remedies exhausted; medical board; medical grounds; medical opinion;



  • Judgment 3994


    126th Session, 2018
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges CERN’s refusal to recognise the illness from which she says she suffers as occupational.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recalls that according to consistent precedent, it may not replace the medical findings of medical experts with its own assessment. However, it does have full competence to say whether there was due process and to examine whether the medical reports on which administrative decisions are based show any material mistake or inconsistency, overlook some essential fact or plainly misread the evidence (see, for example, Judgment 1284, under 4).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1284

    Keywords:

    illness; medical examination; medical opinion;



  • Judgment 3962


    125th Session, 2018
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to downgrade her, reassign her to another position and place her on an additional period of probation.

    Considerations 11 and 15

    Extract:

    Article 52 of the Service Regulations dealt with incompetence. It provided: “(1) Subject to Article 23 of the Convention, a permanent employee who proves incompetent in the performance of his duties may be dismissed.
    The appointing authority may, however, offer to classify the employee concerned in a lower grade and to assign him to a post corresponding to this new grade. [...]"
    [...]
    A third and related issue arising from the language of Article 52(1) is that once this assessment is undertaken by or on behalf of the President, an offer should have been made to the complainant identifying the new lower grade and the post to which she might be assigned. It was not. Reasonably clearly this step of making an offer is intended to ensure that a permanent employee proven to be incompetent in the position she or he then held, has the opportunity of discussing with the EPO what work she or he might do within the EPO into the future. In the ordinary course, one would expect that a decision to offer to classify the permanent employee in a lower grade and assign her or him to a new post would be significantly more attractive to the staff member concerned, found to be incompetent, than a decision to dismiss. Nonetheless important considerations may arise for the affected staff member including alterations to remuneration and likely career paths within the EPO. Indeed it is not possible to entirely discount, once an offer was made, negotiations or at least discussions taking place between the affected staff member and the EPO about what the EPO proposed. In a case such as the present where mental health issues were involved, some form of agreed medical assessment might also be appropriate to gauge competency given that the underlying aim of this process is to place the affected permanent employee in a position where she or he is competent and contributing to the overall work of the EPO.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 52 of the Service Regulations

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; downgrading; medical opinion;



  • Judgment 3949


    125th Session, 2018
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss as irreceivable his claims for compensation for injury or illness attributable to service.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    It is not the Tribunal’s role, in a case such as the present, to adjudicate on the merits of a claim for compensation on medical grounds in the absence of a consideration of the question by a body that has been established for that purpose, if any, within an organisation (such as the ABCC) and in the absence of considered medical opinions addressing the question (see generally Judgment 3538, consideration 12).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3538

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; medical opinion;



  • Judgment 3854


    124th Session, 2017
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not award him compensation for a service-incurred disability.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    Diagnosis based on a patient’s account of past events is entirely orthodox and particularly so if the patient’s account of past events is not challenged.

    Keywords:

    medical opinion;



  • Judgment 3497


    120th Session, 2015
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the refusal of her request that her mother’s condition be recognized as a serious illness.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    illness; insurance benefit; medical opinion;



  • Judgment 3354


    118th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal set aside the decision dismissing the complainant’s request for the reimbursement of pharmaceutical costs on the ground that the case should have been referred to the Medical Committee.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "[T]he President should not have, as she did in the impugned decision, dismissed out of hand the complainant’s appeal against the rejection of his claim for reimbursement for the product and the treatment. The matter should have been considered by the Medical Committee before such action was taken, if it accorded with the opinion of the Medical Committee. Accordingly, the impugned decision is flawed and should be set aside."

    Keywords:

    medical opinion; refund;



  • Judgment 3300


    116th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal dismissed the complaint filed against the decision not to consider the complainant's disability as resulting from an occupational disease.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Articles 89(3), 89(4) and 90(1) of the Service Regulations

    Keywords:

    disability benefit; invalidity; medical board; medical opinion; order; pension; procedural flaw; service-incurred; staff regulations and rules;



  • 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 by a party; safeguard; same;



  • Judgment 2976


    110th Session, 2011
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    Grant of an exceptional long-term care benefit for an insured person suffering from complete paralysis below the arms.
    "[T]he question whether something should be granted as an 'exceptional' measure is one that invites a value judgement akin to that involved in a discretionary decision. As such, it is subject to only limited review. However, it may be reviewed on the grounds, amongst others, that it involves an error of law and/or that it overlooks some material fact (see, for example, Judgments 1281, under 2, and 2514, under 13)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1281, 2514

    Keywords:

    discretion; judicial review; medical grounds; medical opinion;



  • Judgment 2537


    101st Session, 2006
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    One of the two members of the Medical Committee convened to examine the complainant's work capacity attached a handwritten statement to the report that an occupational origin of the invalidity could not be excluded. The Tribunal rules that "it was certainly not appropriate for members of the Office's Administration - faced with a clearly contradictory medical report - to approach the second expert in order to persuade him to withdraw his diverging opinion."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; discontinuance; independence; invalidity; medical board; medical opinion; service-incurred;



  • Judgment 2524


    100th Session, 2006
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 32

    Extract:

    "Although the complainant provided the report of [her doctor] to the Joint Appeals Panel, that did not amount to implied authorisation for it to be given to [her two successive supervisors] for their comments (see Judgment 2271, under 7). There were other means available to the Administration to obtain answers from [the supervisors] to the claims made by the complainant. The disclosure to them of the medical report was a serious breach of confidence and one that, in the circumstances, was particularly insensitive."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2271

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; confidential evidence; internal appeals body; medical opinion; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's interest; supervisor;



  • Judgment 2361


    97th Session, 2004
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal, in keeping with consistent precedent, may not replace the findings of medical boards with its own. But it does have full competence to say whether there was due process and whether the reports used as a basis for administrative decisions show any material mistake or inconsistency, or overlook some essential fact, or plainly misread the evidence (see Judgment 1284, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1284

    Keywords:

    case law; competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; decision; disregard of essential fact; iloat; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedure; report; vested competence;



  • Judgment 2083


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 8 and 9

    Extract:

    The complainant suffered from retinal detachments and a detachment of the vitreous. The organization recognised her eye condition as service incurred. In "September 1998 [...] the [organization] decide[d] to stop reimbursing the bills [she submitted] on [the] grounds [...] that curing her retinal detachments was no longer the object of the treatment. However, it did not show that the service-incurred injuries were not a "direct and principal" cause of the treatment [... ] The Tribunal takes the view that although, as the organization says, the decision to stop reimbursing the bills was at the discretion of the Director-General, it could not be taken without an independent expert medical opinion obtained through a process which provides all the safeguards of transparency and impartiality." The case is therefore sent back to the organization.

    Keywords:

    accident; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; consequence; decision; discretion; due process; executive head; expert inquiry; grounds; illness; independence; insurance benefit; lack of evidence; medical opinion; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure; refund; refusal; safeguard; service-incurred;



  • Judgment 2047


    91st Session, 2001
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The complainant adopts the position taken by the Appeals Committee to the effect that the [organisation] was obligated to appoint its own medical officer for the purposes of dealing with her claim and was not entitled to rely on the medical adviser appointed by [the insurance company] Van Breda for that purpose. For the Tribunal to so hold would amount to a denial of the organisation's right to appoint the medical officer of its choice. The fact that it selects and relies on the same medical adviser as the one appointed by the insurer, whom it has engaged to carry out its obligations to provide health coverage to its staff, is not in the least surprising. Such appointment cannot have any adverse effect upon the complainant who retains the right given by Article 90 [of the Service Regulations] to have any contested issue relating to medical matters determined by the Invalidity Committee."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 90 OF THE SERVICE REGULATIONS

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; insurance; invalidity; medical board; medical consultant; medical opinion; organisation's duties;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "With regard to the complainant's claim to be provided with copies of any medical reports relied upon by [the insurance brokers] Van Breda, it is trite law that a staff member's right to see medical reports may not ordinarily be challenged. As such, the complainant should be provided with copies of medical reports contained in Van Breda's file relating to this matter. Whether or not the [organisation] has these documents in their possession is irrelevant. As the policy holder, it has the right to give instructions that the complainant be given access to these documents and must ensure that she is provided with the information as soon as reasonably possible. [...] It is of no avail that some or all of the reports in question may have been given by the complainant's own doctors: she is entitled to know from Van Breda exactly what medical information about her it has received and from whom."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; duty to inform; insurance; medical opinion; medical records; organisation's duties; right;



  • Judgment 1752


    85th Session, 1998
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "[The Tribunal] may not replace qualified medical opinion with its own, though it may review the procedure and say whether the doctors' findings show any factual mistake or inconsistency, or overlook an essential fact, or draw a plainly wrong conclusion from the evidence."

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; disregard of essential fact; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedure;



  • Judgment 1640


    83rd Session, 1997
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 22

    Extract:

    "The medical opinions of independent medical practitioners would ordinarily prevail and the Tribunal would not interfere. But this is no ordinary case. [...] The Tribunal had to appoint a medical expert to give a final opinion on the complainant's medical condition [...]. That expert found that she was not fit to return to work", a finding that was at odds with the medical opinions that the Agency has relied on to justify its decision.

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; different appraisals; exception; illness; judicial review; limits; medical examination; medical fitness; medical opinion; sick leave;



  • Judgment 1516


    81st Session, 1996
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "The complainant wants the Tribunal to 'declare that UNESCO has failed to act and itself make the final determination [regarding the degree of her invalidity] that the organization has for years been refusing' her. Having put up with years of dilatoriness and prevarication,she is understandably anxious to have her entitlements speedily determined. Being unable, however, to rule on the medical aspects of her case, the Tribunal has no choice but to send the case back to the organization for completion of the process of review in keeping with the rules."

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; competence of tribunal; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; expert inquiry; iloat statute; invalidity; judicial review; medical board; medical examination; medical opinion; rate;



  • Judgment 1284


    75th Session, 1993
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "Precedent has it [...] that the Tribunal may not replace the Board's assessment of medical questions with its own. But it goes further than that: the Tribunal does have full competence to say whether there was due process and whether the medical findings show any material mistake or inconsistency, or overlook some essential fact, or plainly misread the evidence."

    Keywords:

    case law; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedural flaw; procedure; report;



  • Judgment 1248


    74th Session, 1993
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant "applies to the Tribunal for appointment of an expert to inquire into the scientific issues. His application is disallowed because the evidence he submits casts no doubt on the soundness of the medical opinion the organisation is relying on. For the same reason the Tribunal rejects his application for hearings."

    Keywords:

    advisory opinion; appraisal of evidence; expert inquiry; further submissions; medical opinion; oral proceedings; refusal; tribunal;

1, 2 | next >


 
Last updated: 12.08.2019 ^ top