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

Executive head (549,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Executive head
Total judgments found: 204

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >



  • Judgment 2915


    109th Session, 2010
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "The fact that the Director General did not sign the letter [informing the complainant that her request was denied] does not mean that he did not take the relevant decision. The signing of the letter by the Director of [the Human Resources Management Department] is consistent with normal personnel practice. Moreover, the presumption of regularity applies in the absence of cogent evidence to the contrary."

    Keywords:

    competence; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; evidence; executive head; formal requirements; practice; staff regulations and rules; vested competence;



  • Judgment 2899


    108th Session, 2010
    European Free Trade Association
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 21

    Extract:

    "[T]he decision of the chief executive officer of an organisation to recover an unduly paid sum of money falls within his or her discretionary authority and is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal, but this decision must nevertheless be censured if it is tainted with a formal or procedural irregularity, or if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; decision quashed; discretion; executive head; formal flaw; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; procedural flaw; recovery of overpayment;



  • Judgment 2882


    108th Session, 2010
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "Although rules of procedure must be strictly complied with, they must not be construed too pedantically or set traps for staff members who are defending their rights. If these staff members break such a rule, the penalty must fit the purpose of the rule. Consequently, a staff member who appeals to the wrong body does not on that account forfeit the right of appeal (see Judgments 1734, under 3, and 1832, under 6). [...] The fact that an appeal is mistakenly submitted directly to the Appeal Board, as occurred in this case, cannot entail the irreceivability of the appeal. The Appeal Board has a duty to forward to the Director General any document which is intended for his attention and which has been sent to it in error, in order that it may be treated as a request for review."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1734, 1832

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; due process; executive head; formal requirements; good faith; internal appeal; internal appeals body; interpretation; organisation's duties; proportionality; purpose; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; staff member's duties; written rule;



  • Judgment 2845


    107th Session, 2009
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    According to Article 9.8, paragraph 2, of the UPU Staff Regulations, the Director General may, in the interest of the Union, extend the age limit in exceptional cases. The Tribunal considers that "the Director General's refusal to extend the complainant's service beyond the statutory age limit constitutes an act of retaliation [...]. The Director General used his discretionary authority for purposes other than those for which it was intended, thereby committing an abuse of authority. It follows that the impugned decision must be set aside."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 9.8, paragraph 2, of the UPU Staff Regulations

    Keywords:

    age limit; amendment to the rules; career; complaint allowed; decision quashed; discretion; exception; executive head; extension; hidden disciplinary measure; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; purpose; refusal; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2833


    107th Session, 2009
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "[T]he Director-General departed from the Joint Advisory Appeals Board's recommendation. He was entitled to do so provided that he gave clear reasons for not following it, which he did. [...] From a formal point of view, therefore, the impugned decision is beyond criticism."

    Keywords:

    advisory opinion; condition; difference; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; formal requirements; grounds; internal appeals body; recommendation; right;



  • Judgment 2829


    107th Session, 2009
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 3 and 5

    Extract:

    The complainant filed an appeal with the WIPO Appeal Board challenging the decision to suspend him from duty. The Board held that the appeal was irreceivable pursuant to the res judicata rule, inasmuch as it had already issued an opinion on the measure of suspension and no new administrative decision had been taken on this matter. The Director General also deemed the appeal irreceivable pursuant to the res judicata rule.
    The Tribunal considers that "[t]he res judicata rule applies to decisions of judicial bodies, but not to opinions or recommendations issued by administrative bodies. The Director General was therefore obviously wrong to cite this rule as the basis for declaring the internal appeal irreceivable on the grounds that the Appeal Board had already given an opinion on the suspension and that no new administrative decision had been taken on this matter."
    [...]
    "The Organization shall pay the complainant 3,000 Swiss francs in compensation for the moral injury which he suffered owing to the fact that the merits of his internal appeal were not examined."

    Keywords:

    advisory opinion; allowance; compensation; complaint allowed; executive head; general principle; grounds; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judgment of the tribunal; moral injury; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; res judicata; suspension;



  • Judgment 2792


    106th Session, 2009
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "Having launched an internal appeal, a staff member is entitled to know whether the appeal is allowed or dismissed. The fact that certain aspects of the relief sought may have become moot does not absolve the head of an organisation from making a determination on the merits of the appeal."

    Keywords:

    compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; executive head; internal appeal; international civil servant; no cause of action; organisation; organisation's duties; refusal; request by a party; right;



  • Judgment 2762


    105th Session, 2008
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 26 and 27

    Extract:

    The complainant challenges the EPO's decision to recruit the spouse of the former President of the Office. "The Organisation is correct in stating that the Service Regulations do not preclude the recruitment of the spouses of staff members. Nor does there appear to be any regulatory bar to the recruitment of the spouses, friends, or close associates of the highest ranking officials in the Organisation. Whether this type of recruitment ought to be permitted is not for the Tribunal to decide but is a question of policy for each organisation to answer.
    However, where an organisation permits such recruitment, then it is imperative that special procedures be put in place to ensure the integrity and transparency of the selection process. Where such procedures have not been put in place, the presumptions of regularity and bona fides will not apply. In the absence of the operation of these presumptions, it will take very little to establish improper motive or bad faith."

    Keywords:

    appointment; competence of tribunal; competition; executive head; family relationship; good faith; presumption; procedure; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 2747


    105th Session, 2008
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The complainant alleges that the regulations governing the creation of posts - in particular Regulation 2.2 of the Staff Regulations and Article 102.6.15 of the General Regulations of the UPU - have been violated. "[T]he Tribunal notes [...] that the complainant is entitled to rely on all the provisions of the General Regulations and Staff Regulations, including those which primarily concern relations between the Council of Administration and the Director General insofar as a breach of these provisions may affect his personal situation."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Regulation 2.2 and Article 102.6.15 of the General Regulations of the UPU

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; creation of post; executive body; executive head; injury; provision; right; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 2732


    105th Session, 2008
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 16 and 17

    Extract:

    "Staff Regulation 9.2(c) states that the Director General may at any time terminate an appointment of a staff member serving a probationary period if, in his opinion, it would be in the interest of the Organization. This provision, however, does not displace the well-established principle 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 Judgments 1212 and 2529). As well, a probationer is entitled to a timely warning so that measures can be taken to remedy the situation (see Judgment 2414).
    In the present case, given the nature of the complainant's functions, a period of seven days to demonstrate improvement was clearly inadequate. Accordingly, the decision to terminate her contract must be set aside."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: IOM Staff Regulation 9.2(c)
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1212, 2414, 2529

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; decision quashed; executive head; notice; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; probation; right; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; termination; unsatisfactory service;



  • Judgment 2728


    105th Session, 2008
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant submits that the Director-General's decision not to extend his appointment is unlawful. "There is no material to support a finding of bias or other abuse of discretion. Certainly, none is to be discerned from the fact that the complainant's former post has not yet been opened to competition."

    Keywords:

    bias; competition; contract; decision; discretion; evidence; executive head; lack of evidence; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract;



  • Judgment 2699


    104th Session, 2008
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 24

    Extract:

    "The case law makes it clear that when rejecting a recommendation of an internal appeals body that favours a complainant, the final decision-maker must give clear and cogent reasons for such a decision (see Judgments 2092, 2261, 2347 and 2355)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2092, 2261, 2347, 2355

    Keywords:

    case law; decision; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; grounds; internal appeals body; recommendation; refusal;



  • Judgment 2698


    104th Session, 2008
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 13 and 14

    Extract:

    The complainant was notified of a number of serious charges against him and was informed that he would be suspended from duty with pay until the end of the investigation into the charges. "The Director General did not [...] implement the Appeal Board's recommendation that he should conclude with all due speed the investigation into the allegations of serious misconduct against the complainant and should take a decision within a reasonable time. In fact he did not conduct the investigation with the dispatch required by the Tribunal's case law and by the circumstances of the case, and he thus caused an unjustified delay in the handling of the case. The explanations given by the Organization in its submissions are irrelevant, particularly because they do not indicate that the completion of the investigation was delayed through any fault on the part of the complainant.
    By prolonging an essentially temporary measure beyond a reasonable time, without any valid grounds, thereby placing the complainant in a situation of uncertainty as to his further career, the Organization caused him moral injury which must be redressed by awarding him the amount of 10,000 United States dollars."

    Keywords:

    allowance; breach; career; case law; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; decision; delay; executive head; grounds; injury; inquiry; internal appeals body; moral injury; organisation's duties; provisional measures; reasonable time; recommendation; serious misconduct; suspensive action;



  • Judgment 2669


    104th Session, 2008
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The Director-General's authority to extend a staff member's service beyond the retirement age is found in Staff Regulation 301.9.5. "This provision makes it clear that a decision to grant an extension of a staff member's contract is within the discretionary authority of the Director-General. It is well established in the case law that the Tribunal will only intervene in these circumstances if it can be shown that the executive head of the organisation acted without authority, breached a rule of form or procedure, or that the decision was based on a mistake of fact or law, or overlooked an essential fact, or that clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the facts."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: FAO Staff Regulation 301.9.5

    Keywords:

    age limit; case law; competence of tribunal; contract; decision; discretion; disregard of essential fact; executive head; extension; flaw; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; procedural flaw; refusal; retirement;



  • Judgment 2649


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    Acting in his capacity as Chairman of the Staff Committee of the EPO's sub-office in Vienna, the complainant submitted a request to the President of the Office that the "staff salary scales mentioned in the annex to Part 2 of the Codex" be forwarded to all agencies supplying temporary personnel to the Office. The President refused to grant the request submitted to him, denying that temporary workers were entitled to remuneration equal to that of EPO staff and underlining that neither the Service Regulations nor the conditions of employment for contract staff applied to temporary workers. The EPO submits that the complainant does not have locus standi to represent temporary workers supplied to the Office. "It is well settled that members of the Staff Committee may rely on their position as such to ensure observance of the Service Regulations (see Judgments 1147 and 1897); but in order for a complaint submitted to the Tribunal on behalf of a Staff Committee to be receivable, it must allege a breach of guarantees which the Organisation is legally bound to provide to staff who are connected with the Office by an employment contract or who have permanent employee status, this being a sine qua non for the Tribunal's jurisdiction. In the absence of such a connection resting on a contract or deriving from status, the claim that the Office should forward its salary scales to agencies supplying temporary personnel - whose conditions of employment and remuneration are in any event beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal - cannot be entertained."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1147, 1897

    Keywords:

    breach; claim; communication to third party; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; contract; enforcement; equal treatment; executive head; external collaborator; international civil servant; locus standi; no provision; organisation's duties; provision; receivability of the complaint; refusal; request by a party; right; safeguard; salary; same; scale; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union; terms of appointment; vested competence;



  • Judgment 2646


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 13 and 14

    Extract:

    The complainant was dismissed at the end of his probationary period. He states that despite his repeated requests he was never transferred to another directorate. "As to the case law, the complainant relies on Judgment 396 in support of [this] assertion [...]. The issue in that case was whether the head of the Organisation had correctly applied a particular provision of the Staff Regulations authorising him to terminate the appointment of a probationer at any time in the Organisation's interests. The Tribunal stated that '[a]s a rule, before a [probationer] is dismissed thought should be given to transferring him to some other post on trial, especially if he is junior in rank'. It must, however, be noted that this was said in the context of a misunderstanding between the probationer and his supervisor and the Tribunal's observation that such a misunderstanding does not necessarily justify instant dismissal. In the present case, the stated reason for the dismissal was poor performance.
    To conclude that in situations of poor performance a staff member on probation will always be entitled to a transfer prior to being dismissed undermines the whole purpose of probationary terms. In some circumstances a transfer may be the proper option, but the circumstances of the present case do not warrant this finding."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 396

    Keywords:

    case law; discretion; enforcement; executive head; general principle; grounds; organisation; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; probation; provision; purpose; refusal; request by a party; right; staff regulations and rules; supervisor; termination; transfer; unsatisfactory service; working relations;



  • Judgment 2635


    103rd Session, 2007
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "While the head of an organisation must take into account the organisation's interests and the staff member's abilities and interests in the exercise of the discretion to transfer a staff member, in cases where the two are at odds, greater weight may be accorded by the decision-maker to the interests of the organisation (see Judgment 883)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 883

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; difference; discretion; executive head; organisation; organisation's interest; qualifications; staff member's interest; transfer;



  • Judgment 2616


    102nd Session, 2007
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 24

    Extract:

    "The failure of the [Joint Disciplinary Committee] and, in turn, the Director-General to take into account the highly relevant evidence as to the complainant's health [...] constitutes an error of law."

    Keywords:

    advisory body; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; disciplinary procedure; disregard of essential fact; evidence; executive head; health reasons; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 2582


    102nd Session, 2007
    International Olive Oil Council
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The IOOC recognised the Tribunal's competence by a letter of 19 September 2003 addressed to the Director-General of the International Labour Office (ILO). "Although the complainant's appointment with the IOOC ended prior to that recognition, which was approved by the ILO's Governing Body at its 288th Session in November 2003, the Tribunal considers that it may properly hear the present case brought by a former official of the IOOC who, subsequently to that recognition, has alleged a breach of statutory provisions."

    Keywords:

    breach; competence of tribunal; complaint; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; date; declaration of recognition; executive body; executive head; provision; separation from service; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2562


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

    Considerations 5 and 6

    Extract:

    The Organisation submits that the complaints are irreceivable because the internal appeals, although timely filed with the President of the Office, had not yet been considered by the Appeals Committee at the time when the complaints were filed. "The EPO cannot be heard to argue that the complainant has failed to exhaust internal means of redress when the sole reason for his failing to do so was the EPO's own failure to abide by its own Service Regulations and to follow the timelines under Article 109(2). [...] The complaints are [therefore] receivable."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 109(2) of EPO Service Regulations

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; breach; complaint; date; executive head; grounds; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; patere legem; provision; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; time limit;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal's case law has determined that the head of an international organisation has the 'executive authority to assign staff to different posts' (Judgment 534), and 'is empowered to change the duties assigned to his subordinates' (Judgment 265)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 265, 534

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; assignment; case law; discretion; executive head; iloat; international civil servant; organisation; post; supervisor;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | next >


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top