Judgment 2256
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 14-16
Extract:
"With regard to the role of a tax reimbursement agreement, the Tribunal stated the following [in judgment 2032]: "It would be strange indeed if the absence of [a tax reimbursement agreement (TRA)] could be invoked by an international organisation or its member states to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. If a member state in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that state."[T]he evident corollary of that statement is that it would similarly be strange if the existence of an agreement could be invoked by an international organisation to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. Such an agreement is meant to set the terms of a member state's commitment to refund an organisation for tax reimbursements. It must, however, conform with international law and cannot be used to undermine the fundamental principles of tax exemption recalled by the Tribunal. Thus, even if the text of the TRA had the reach which the organisation contends for it, which may be doubted, it would simply be unenforceable as being contrary to law. [...] It is likewise with the provisions of the Staff Regulations which, in the organisation's submissions, would limit the complainant's right to tax reimbursement to the amounts actually paid to the organisation by the United States under the TRA. Like the TRA itself, the Staff Regulations must be in conformity with the requirements of the law and where they are not, they are simply unenforceable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2032
Keywords:
equal treatment; international civil service principles; member state; no provision; privileges and immunities; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 2083
92nd Session, 2002
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 8-9
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:
consequence; decision; discretion; due process; executive head; expert inquiry; grounds; illness; independence; lack of evidence; medical expenses; medical opinion; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; professional accident; refund; refusal; safeguard; service-incurred;
Judgment 2063
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Tribunal is fully competent to consider whether the Office is right in maintaining that [the insurance broker] Van Breda correctly exercised its authority in rejecting the request to meet the cost of transferring the complainant to a convalescent home."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; discretion; health insurance; judicial review; refund; refusal; request by a party;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The authority of the insurance brokers goes beyond a simple right to make an administrative check of the claims it receives [...]. [Insurers] have the right to check whether, under the insurance contract, they are liable for the costs of the care dispensed. But they must so exercise that authority as to provide the insured with a guarantee that their claims to coverage are examined with all due care."
Keywords:
condition; contract; discretion; duty of care; health insurance; insurance; medical expenses; refund; request by a party; safeguard;
Consideration 8
Extract:
After the complainant underwent surgery, the insurance brokers refused to cover his convalescence in a home. "In order to assess any physical injury suffered by the complainant, it is necessary to ascertain the later consequences for his health of the refusal to meet the costs of his admission to a convalescent home, and the fact that he did not as a result stay in such a home. These are purely medical matters which [...] need to be referred to the Invalidity Committee".
Keywords:
claim; competence; consequence; health insurance; illness; medical board; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; refund; refusal; request by a party;
Judgment 2032
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"If a Member State in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that State."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"One of the purposes of staff assessment is surely to put the organisation in funds to protect its employees against States which refuse to recognise their tax-exempt status."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; purpose; refund; refusal; salary; staff assessment; tax;
Consideration 17
Extract:
"If the organisation does not [...] contest the exempt status of the complainant, it is its duty to protect him against the claims of the authorities of a Member State, to reimburse him the amount of tax he has paid to the State, and to employ its own considerable power, authority and influence to have the [...] authorities [of that state] change their position. [...] By requiring him to appeal against his [...] tax assessment while conceding the tax-exempt status of his [...] income the organisation has failed in its duty to the complainant."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Judgment 1849
87th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 18-19
Extract:
"The Tribunal considers that, in accordance with its jurisprudence, if an official receives an overpayment by mistake it should be reimbursed. Nevertheless, the organization should take into account any circumstances which would make it unfair or unjust to require repayment. [...] In the Tribunal's opinion there is no indebtedness by the complainant to the organization. It was responsible for making payments on behalf of the United Nations, but has been fully reimbursed. The organization therefore, was not entitled to withhold the grants due or make deductions from salary under rule 380.5.2 since the complainant was not indebted to it."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: STAFF RULE 380.5.2 OF WHO
Keywords:
amount; criteria; debt; deduction; equity; exception; recovery of overpayment; refund; unjust enrichment;
Judgment 1491
80th Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"CERN has but one obligation under R IV 2.02: to refund taxes paid by officials 'on remuneration and benefits received from the organization'. [...] CERN is not to blame for the resulting increase in the rates of taxation of the complainants' total income. All it can do is pay back to French citizens on its staff the amounts they have paid in tax on their international earnings: it exerts control neither over the tax brackets and rates set by French law, nor over the method of reckoning their total income, which is just a feature of the French manner of processing income tax."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF REGULATION R IV 2.02
Keywords:
domestic law; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; rate; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Consideration 8
Extract:
In respect of earnings from other sources than CERN, "the staff who are not French do fare better because only their other income counts for the purpose of reckoning rates of income tax and it therefore falls within lower tax brackets, whereas for the French citizens the whole of their income counts for that purpose. But the difference in treatment is not of the organization's making: it is due solely to the working of French tax law."
Keywords:
domestic law; equal treatment; nationality; rate; refund; tax;
Judgment 1438
79th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was denied a further extension of the period in which he was entitled to claim the refund of removal expenses. The Tribunal considers that "in accordance with its case law, [it] will not substitute its own views for those of the director-general in a matter in which he has discretion."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; executive head; judicial review; new time limit; refund; removal expenses; time limit;
Judgment 1367
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 11 and 16
Extract:
"The dispute is about the time in which a staff member of WHO may exercise his right to removal of his household effects at the organization's expense upon retirement. [...] The Director-General's decision is arbitrary, not just because it fails to state the reasons for choosing the [...] new deadline for the refund of the costs of removal, but because it gives no consistent reply to the complainant's claim. It is a wrong exercise of discretion."
Keywords:
bias; breach; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; limits; refund; removal expenses; time limit;
Judgment 1366
77th Session, 1994
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 13-14
Extract:
The complainant's education grant gave rise to an overpayment. He pleads that there is a time limit for the recovery of overpayments. The UPU observes that "any payment made in error may be recovered" but it has nevertheless waived some of the sum due. "In the circumstances the time limit the union has set is much to the complainant's advantage and his plea under this head therefore fails."
Keywords:
amount; education expenses; recovery of overpayment; refund; time bar; time limit; unjust enrichment;
Considerations 11-12
Extract:
The complainant's education allowance gave rise to an overpayment. He alleges breach of the rule against retroactivity. "He is wrong. [...] What is at issue is the recovery of overpayments; and the complainant [...] must have been aware of the patent disproportion between the advances he was receiving and the education expenses he had actually incurred. So he may not properly plead any mistake in interpretation."
Keywords:
amount; education expenses; non-retroactivity; recovery of overpayment; refund; unjust enrichment;
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant's education grant gave rise to an overpayment. "He seeks to justify his behaviour by pleading that other staff members had done the same. The plea fails because equality in law does not embrace equality in the breach of it."
Keywords:
amount; education expenses; equal treatment; refund; unjust enrichment;
Judgment 1347
77th Session, 1994
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant received financial aid from the PAHO to pursue her studies. Her university waived part of her tuition fees so that the cost to her was less than the amount she collected. "The conclusion is that she did not take sufficient care to make full disclosure to the organization of the assistance given by the university."
Keywords:
allowance; amount; duty to inform; education expenses; refund; staff member's duties; unjust enrichment;
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant received financial aid from the PAHO to pursue her studies. Her university waived part of her tuition fees so that the cost to her was less than the amount she collected. "Having obtained financial benefits to which she was not entitled, the complainant was under an obligation to refund the over-payments and the PAHO was entitled to recover them."
Keywords:
allowance; amount; education expenses; recovery of overpayment; refund; unjust enrichment;
Judgment 1224
74th Session, 1993
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
The complainant is challenging the Agency's refusal to refund her taxes according to a specific method. She alleges discriminatory treatment inasmuch as officials of the United Nations Organisation and other international organisations have the benefit of that method. "In this particular area there is no common-system method which the Agency is in law obliged to apply. The principle of equal treatment therefore does not necessarily mean equal treatment for the staff of the various international organisations, each of which is autonomous and applies its own rules and regulations to its staff."
Keywords:
coordinated organisations; equal treatment; refund; rule of another organisation; tax;
Judgment 1195
73rd Session, 1992
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complainant having received undue payment, the Union claimed a refund. The complainant challenges this on the grounds that "because of prescription the debt has become unenforceable. There is indeed a widely recognised principle that lapse of time may extinguish an obligation, but the difficulty here is that the Union's rules set no time limit for such extinctive prescription." However the Tribunal holds that the time between the payment of the material sums and the Union's request for their repayment "was not long enough to warrant declaring the undue payments irrecoverable. Not only is the period of extinctive prescription much longer in most national systems of law, but the complainant pleads no personal difficulty or hardship in making repayment: the Union is not claiming lump-sum reimbursement but is spreading it over eighteen months."
Keywords:
debt; domestic law; reasonable time; recovery of overpayment; refund; time limit;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is a general principle of law that any sum paid on a mistaken assumption of fact is recoverable. And since the complainant received payment on the assumption that her husband was her dependant and since that assumption later proved to be mistaken, the sums she received are, according to that principle, recoverable."
Keywords:
family allowance; general principle; recovery of overpayment; refund; right;
Judgment 1182
73rd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Under Articles R IV 2.01 and 2.02 of CERN's Staff Regulations staff members must comply with national tax law. CERN, however, refunds any direct taxation on pay upon receiving proof of payment. The complainant, a Frenchman, met his obligations toward his home country. Owing to a peculiar feature of French tax law, part of the amount he had paid did not appear on the supporting documents which he had submitted to CERN with his claim for refund. The organization's decision must be set aside because it is at odds with the principle "that all the staff of an organisation shall enjoy equal treatment".
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R IV 2.01 OF THE CERN STAFF REGULATIONS;
ARTICLE R IV 2.02 OF THE CERN STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
equal treatment; privileges and immunities; refund; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 1180
73rd Session, 1992
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-3
Extract:
The complainant received treatment in a clinic. He had an operation and on that account spent five days in the clinic's department of surgery. The organisation agreed to refund the costs of his operation and the five-day hospital stay which it entailed. However it refused to regard the remainder of his stay in the clinic as "hospitalisation" and treated it as "a cure at a watering place". The material issue is whether that decision was lawful. "The Tribunal is satisfied that the Director General was right to decide that the complainant's stay at the clinic did not warrant the refund of his costs at the 'hospitalisation' rate [...] and that to regard but five days of that stay as 'a cure at a watering place' rather than hospitalisation for medical treatment was in line with the material rules."
Keywords:
cure; health insurance; illness; medical expenses; refund;
Judgment 1148
72nd Session, 1992
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
The complainant objects to the Sickness Fund's refusal to refund the costs of a given item. "Eurocontrol has [...] discretion under Article 24, which empowers the fund to refuse refund of the costs of treatment which the medical officer deems to be 'non-functional, superfluous or unnecessary'. As was said in Judgment 1088, [article] 24 covers all sorts of 'treatments', however the term 'pharmaceutical product' in [article] 14 is to be construed."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLES 14 AND 24 OF RULE 10
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1088
Keywords:
definition; discretion; health insurance; insurance; limits; medical consultant; medical expenses; refund; refusal;
Considerations 12-13
Extract:
Having submitted a claim for the refund of the costs of an item, the complainant first received a statement from the Sickness Fund which alluded to "non-refundable items". Only later did a note indicate which items were being refused. Eurocontrol contends that the time limit ran from the date at which she got the original statement from the Fund, the later note having merely confirmed the earlier decision. "The argument fails. The cryptic allusion in the statement to 'non-refundable items' did not suffice to tell the complainant just what she was being refused. The 'act adversely affecting' her - to quote the Regulations - did not become specific until she got the [note] and so that is the date at which the time limit for her internal appeal began. [...] She acted in time."
Keywords:
confirmatory decision; decision; health insurance; medical expenses; refund; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 1139
72nd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant was to undergo a course of sea-water therapy following an accident recognised as attributable to the performance of official duties. Although she had been told of the amount she was to get in compensation for her expenses, she spent considerably more. "It was not reasonable of her to assume that the expenses of a stay in a luxury hotel would be repaid when all indications [...] were to the contrary." There being other hotels to choose from, "it was not essential to the success of the treatment that the complainant should stay at the most luxurious".
Keywords:
cure; health insurance; medical expenses; refund;
Judgment 1118
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 18-19
Extract:
The complainants seek the quashing of a 1.25 per cent "reduction" in the repayment of education expenses in keeping with a decision taken by Eurocontrol's Permanent Commission to bring in a 5 per cent differential between net pay at Eurocontrol and net pay in the European Communities. The Tribunal holds that "the objection that there has been no statement of the reasons is unsound: the staff have known all along the reasons for the adjustments, which have been fully discussed in the context of the cases. There was therefore no need to state reasons for the individual decisions [...]. The Tribunal may [not] review the reasons of policy underlying the general decision." Besides, the reasons fall within the ambit of Article 65.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 65 OF THE EUROCONTROL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
adjustment; competence of tribunal; duty to substantiate decision; education expenses; general decision; grounds; individual decision; judicial review; reduction of salary; refund; salary;
Consideration 25
Extract:
"According to Articles 62 and 67 of the Staff Regulations, one item of pay is family allowances; they include the education allowance, of which education expenses form a part, and, contrary to what the complainants make out, the fact that such expenses are paid on the strength of supporting evidence does not make the education allowance as a whole any less an item of pay."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLES 62 AND 67 OF THE EUROCONTROL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
education expenses; elements; family allowance; refund; salary;
Judgment 1101
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainants, who are employees of Eurocontrol, seek the quashing of an Office Notice insofar as it informs staff that expenses arising from trace-element therapy (oligo-elements), aromatherapy and phytotherapy are not to be refunded. The Agency pleas that the complaint is irreceivable. "It is worth pointing out that in Judgment 961 [...] of 27 June 1989 the Tribunal held that it was 'competent only to entertain individual and actual disputes' and would not make prior rulings of general purport. Again in Judgment 1081 [...] of 29 January 1991 it affirmed that no appeal would lie against a general decision provided that it was such as needed in all cases to be followed by a challengeable individual one."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 961, 1081
Keywords:
administrative instruction; cause of action; competence of tribunal; general decision; health insurance; individual decision; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; refund; refusal;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainants are challenging an Office Notice that merely informs them that expenses incurred for certain forms of treatment will not be refunded. "There will be a decision challengeable under Article VII of the Tribunal's Statute only when Eurocontrol has, in accordance with its rules, refused a staff member refund of the cost of a particular sort of treatment. The Tribunal will then rule according to the criteria it stated in Judgment 1088 of 29 January 1991, taking medical advice if need be. It may not make a prior ruling of general application to the sorts of treatment covered by the Office Notice."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1088
Keywords:
administrative instruction; competence of tribunal; general decision; health insurance; individual decision; medical expenses; receivability of the complaint; refund;
Judgment 1096
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
In Judgment 963 the Tribunal set aside in part an initial reduction in the rate of refund of educational expenses at Eurocontrol insofar as the reduction was given retroactive effect. The present complaints challenge the second reduction. Recalling a recurring principle in the case law (see Judgments 726 and 825) that "a reduction in pay may not be so great as to disrupt the structure of the terms of appointment and that there must be sound reasons for it", the Tribunal orders further submissions in which the defendant organisation shall explain in greater detail the favourable effects of the measure.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 726, 825, 963
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; education expenses; further submissions; interlocutory order; reduction of salary; refund; salary;
Judgment 1095
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant's fees for difficult confinement were refunded at the 100 per cent rate up to a maximum limit reckoned by likening the treatment she received to a surgical operation. Though the Tribunal finds nothing wrong with setting maximum limits in general it holds that there was no valid limit at the material time on costs incurred for difficult confinements and that the complainant was entitled to the refund of her confinement expenses in full.
Keywords:
amount; analogy; flaw; health insurance; maximum limit; medical expenses; no provision; rate; reckoning; refund;
