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 2351


    97th Session, 2004
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 7 c) and 8 a)

    Extract:

    When he was recruited the complainant provided a copy of a diploma but its authenticity was questioned a few years later. The matter was queried with the educational establishment and the Secretary-General then issued the complainant a written censure. The Tribunal considers that "there was not sufficient proof either that the diploma was not issued to the complainant [...] or that the latter had been informed that, according to the [educational establishment], he was not entitled to receive it. The Secretary-General might have enquired further into the aspects which remained uncertain, but did not do so. The 'likelihood' referred to by the Secretary-General, if it is not incontrovertibly ascertained, cannot make up for the lack of conclusive evidence. Based as it is on an arbitrary appraisal of the facts, the impugned decision as far as it concerns the disciplinary sanction must therefore be set aside. Although it did not give rise to a written decision, the non-renewal of the short-term contract was based on charges levelled against the complainant in the course of the disciplinary procedure. The mere cancellation of the disciplinary sanction must entail that of the decision of non-renewal."

    Keywords:

    bias; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; contract; decision; decision quashed; degree; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; executive head; grounds; implied decision; inquiry; lack of evidence; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; right; short-term; terms of appointment; warning;



  • Judgment 2350


    97th Session, 2004
    European Free Trade Association
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 17 and 18

    Extract:

    The complainant submits that the behaviour of the Administration towards her amounted to harassment since she got only a one-step salary increase, rather than the two proposed by her supervisor, and only a two-year extension of contract rather than the customary three years. The Tribunal considers that such decisions "were decisions which the Secretary-General was entitled to reach in the exercise of his discretion. That being so, such decisions can only be viewed as part of a campaign of harassment if the other events upon which the complainant relies give rise to an inference that these were taken because of hostility, ill will or other improper motive. The complainant has failed to prove harassment."

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; cumulative decisions; decision; discretion; duration of appointment; executive head; extension; grounds; harassment; increment; lack of evidence; recommendation; supervisor; working relations;



  • Judgment 2324


    97th Session, 2004
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 10 and 11

    Extract:

    "[P]ursuant to Rule 5.3.01, only the Director General had authority to place the complainant on special leave with full pay [...] However, [...] it was the Director of Administration, not the Director-General, who wrote to the complainant and informed her that he was 'placing [her] on special leave with pay until further notice'. That letter contains no reference whatsoever to the Director General or to any discussions with the latter. And although, in her request for review, the complainant expressly contended that the Director of Administration had taken the decision in question, the Director-General did not say anything to the contrary in his reply. [...] That correspondence gives rise to the very strong inference that the decision was taken by the Director of Administration and not by the Director General."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Interim Staff Rule 5.3.01

    Keywords:

    competence; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; delegated authority; evidence; executive head; presumption; special leave;



  • Judgment 2315


    96th Session, 2004
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 20

    Extract:

    The Commission adopted a directive stipulating that staff members appointed to the Professional and higher categories and internationally recruited staff should not, except in certain limited exceptions, remain in service for more than seven years. In accordance with this directive, the complainant's contract was not renewed. "Although the embodiment of the seven year policy in [the] directive may properly be viewed as the prescribing of a term or condition upon which fixed-term contracts may be granted, it does not itself operate as the imposition of that term or condition. To be effective, a term or condition of the kind now in question must be incorporated in the contract, even if only by reference: a reference to the Staff Regulations and Rules is not sufficient because they do not incorporate the [...] directive in question. By implementing the seven year policy in the way that he purported to do in the present case, the Executive Secretary was attempting to enforce a term or condition that was not incorporated in the contract between the complainant and the Preparatory Commission."

    Keywords:

    appointment; career; complainant; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; contract; effect; enforcement; exception; executive head; fixed-term; general principle; international civil servant; limits; non-local status; non-renewal of contract; organisation; professional category; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment; written rule;



  • Judgment 2314


    96th Session, 2004
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    The post in respect of which the complainant was receiving a special post allowance was transferred but he has continued to perform the duties of the post. The Director-General has taken the view that transfer was equivalent to the abolition of the post and the allowance was terminated. "The principle of equal pay for work of equal value requires that, until a proper evaluation of the work performed by the complainant is carried out, he should be remunerated at a rate equivalent to that which he would have received by way of special post allowance for so long as he continues to perform all of the duties and responsibilities of the abolished post."

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; complaint allowed; equal treatment; executive head; general principle; organisation's duties; payment; post; refusal; salary; same; special post allowance; transfer; work appraisal;

    Consideration 21

    Extract:

    The post in respect of which the complainant was receiving a special post allowance was transferred but he has continued to perform the duties of the post. The Director-General has taken the view that transfer was equivalent to the abolition of the post and the allowance was terminated. The relevant Manual provision "does prohibit payment of a special post allowance when a post has been abolished. However, it does not and cannot relieve an employer of its duty to ensure proper remuneration for extra duties and responsibilities discharged by an employee over and above those of the substantive post which he or she holds."

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; complaint allowed; executive head; international civil servant; organisation; organisation's duties; payment; post held by complainant; provision; refusal; salary; special post allowance; staff regulations and rules; transfer;



  • Judgment 2306


    96th Session, 2004
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 10 and 15

    Extract:

    As a general rule, damages for breach of contract, including wrongful termination of a contract of employment, are confined to the amount necessary to put the injured party in the position he or she would have enjoyed if the contract had been performed. Thus, ordinarily, in the case of wrongful termination, an employee is entitled to material damages consisting of salary and entitlements up to the date on which the contract would normally have expired. In this case "the Appeals Committee found that 'the [complainant's] dignity had been harmed by the administrative procedure leading to termination and that some redress for the material and moral injury he suffered [was] warranted' [...]. Notwithstanding that finding, the Committee only recommended payment of an amount equivalent to salary and allowances until the end of the complainant's fixed-term contract. As already explained, he was entitled to that amount for material damage. Thus, the effect of the recommendation of the Appeals Committee was to deny the complainant compensation for moral injury notwithstanding its finding that his dignity had been harmed. That was an error of law and, as the Director-General's decision was based on the recommendations of the Appeals Committee, it necessarily involves the same error of law."

    Keywords:

    allowance; amount; breach; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; contract; decision; effect; executive head; fixed-term; general principle; internal appeals body; international civil servant; material injury; misuse of authority; moral injury; procedure; recommendation; reconstruction of career; respect for dignity; right; salary; same; termination;



  • Judgment 2290


    96th Session, 2004
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The Organisation contends that the internal appeal against a decision not to refund medical costs was not lodged in time. In doing so, it takes as the starting point of the time-limit the insurance representative's statement of account rejecting the request for refund. This "plea [...] is unfounded [...] This is because the insurance representative is not an organ of the Organisation, able to take decisions in the meaning of the Office's Service Regulations for Permanent Employees. Decisions concerning insurance benefits are taken by the Office, and more specifically by its President, in accordance with Article 83 of those Regulations."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 83 of the Service Regulations for Permanent Employees of the European Patent Office

    Keywords:

    complaint; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; executive head; illness; insurance; insurance benefit; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 2278


    96th Session, 2004
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "As the titular head of the very administration whose conduct is being called into question, the President of the Office must be scrupulous in the performance of his function as final decision-maker in internal appeals. It is his duty not only to be fair and objective; his conduct must also make it manifest that he has been so. It is not enough to state, as the President appears to do in the impugned decision, that he thinks the administration has put forward the better case. That is not a reason but a conclusion. The internal appellate process is designed and intended to provide fair, satisfactory and rapid resolution of staff grievances in international organisations."

    Keywords:

    bias; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; internal appeal; organisation's duties; purpose; safeguard;



  • Judgment 2272


    96th Session, 2004
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    A rule, "approved by the Administrative Council, [cannot] be called into question by the President. It is true that, when deciding to promote or not to promote a permanent employee, the President enjoys discretionary authority, subject to the Tribunal┐s limited power of review. Within the bounds of this limited power of review, however, the Tribunal considers whether decisions referred to it are not flawed by abuse of authority or error of law. In the present case, the complainant argues rightly that by refusing to apply to his case a rule which had been approved by the Administrative Council, despite the fact that he met the necessary requirements, the President committed an error of law and abused his authority."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; discretion; enforcement; executive body; executive head; interpretation; judicial review; limits; misuse of authority; promotion; refusal; repeal; written rule;



  • Judgment 2261


    95th Session, 2003
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15 and 16

    Extract:

    The complainant challenges a disciplinary measure of dismissal for misconduct based on the following three charges: (1) external commercial activities and misrepresentation, (2) disloyalty, and (3) insubordination. In the challenged decision, the Director-General refused to follow the Appeals Committee's recommendation to the effect that the three charges be dismissed and confirmed the dismissal, dealing in detail with the first charge. Although the Tribunal acknowledges that the evidence justifies the Director-General's position, it sets aside the impugned decision because "the Director-General entirely failed to give any reason whatsoever for disagreeing with the Committee's recommendations respecting the second and third charges". The Tribunal adds that "it is not for [...] itself [to] examine the evidence to find justification for the unmotivated decision of the Director-General. [...] Nor should it condone the organization's failure to bring the internal appeal process to a timely and proper conclusion effectively depriving the complainant of both his remedy and his employment for over three years. Accordingly, it will quash the penalty on the first charge only and refer the matter back to the Director-General for a new decision on the penalty after giving the complainant full opportunity to make representations."

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; concurrent employment; conduct; decision; decision quashed; disciplinary measure; due process; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; fitness for international civil service; insubordination; internal appeal; internal appeals body; misconduct; organisation's duties; refusal; report; right of appeal; right to reply; separation from service; termination; time limit;



  • Judgment 2232


    95th Session, 2003
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the decision impugned before the Tribunal is not an administrative decision, but essentially a political one. The Tribunal holds that "the complainant was an international civil servant who was entitled to appeal to the Tribunal against a decision to terminate his appointment. That decision must be viewed as an administrative decision, even though it was taken by the Conference of the States parties."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; decision; executive body; executive head; grounds; iloat; international civil servant; interpretation; member state; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; termination;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director- General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the complainant was not a staff member. "The defendant [...] considers that since the particular case of the Director-General of the Organisation was not expressly provided for in the texts on which the Tribunal's jurisdiction is based, an express provision recognising its jurisdiction would have been necessary. It points out that [another international organisation] (UNESCO), having realised that it had no statutory provision nor any contractual stipulation attributing jurisdiction in the event of a dispute involving its Director-General, decided in 1999 to include such a clause in the contract it signed with him. whilst the Tribunal does not deny that UNESCO thereby clarified difficulties which were liable to arise, it does not view that as authority for the reverse proposition that contracts containing no such clause, entered into by other organisations with their respective chief administrative officers, must be deemed to exclude the jurisdiction of the Tribunal."

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; contract; decision; exception; executive head; grounds; interpretation; no provision; organisation; provision; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; termination; written rule;

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. "In accordance with the established case law of all international administrative tribunals, the Tribunal reaffirms that the independence of international civil servants is an essential guarantee, not only for the civil servants themselves, but also for the proper functioning of international organisations. In the case of heads of organisations, that independence is protected, inter alia, by the fact that they are appointed for a limited term of office. To concede that the authority in which the power of appointment is vested - in this case the Conference of the States parties of the Organisation - may terminate that appointment in its unfettered discretion, would constitute an unacceptable violation of the principles on which international organisations' activities are founded [...], by rendering officials vulnerable to pressures and to political change. The possibility that a measure of the kind taken against the complainant may, exceptionally, be justified in cases of grave misconduct cannot be excluded, but such a measure, being punitive in nature, could only be taken in full compliance with the principle of due process, following a procedure enabling the individual concerned to defend his or her case effectively before an independent and impartial body."

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; appointment; breach; case law; complaint allowed; condition; discretion; exception; executive body; executive head; fixed-term; general principle; hidden disciplinary measure; iloat; independence; internal appeals body; international civil servant; limits; member state; organisation; right to reply; safeguard; serious misconduct; termination; tribunal;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability because the matter was not referred to the Appeals Council. "In the present case, that procedure was not and clearly could not have been followed. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how the Director-General, stripped of his functions, could have appealed to the Appeals Council established under his own authority, against a decision of the Conference of the States parties, with a view to obtaining a final decision by the new Director-General. [...] An appeal to the Appeals Council was inconceivable, and the impugned decision was clearly a final decision - within the meaning of Article VII of the Tribunal's Statute [...] in that situation, a direct appeal to the Tribunal [...] was clearly the only remedy available to the complainant."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE TRIBUNAL'S STATUTE

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; competence; complaint allowed; decision; direct appeal to tribunal; executive body; executive head; grounds; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; member state; procedure; purpose; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; termination;



  • Judgment 2226


    95th Session, 2003
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 21

    Extract:

    The complainant was reassigned from one day to the next. "Considering the complainant's length of service (12 years with the organization), the absence of any report of misconduct or unsatisfactory performance on his part, or any indication of urgency that might have justified a sudden, unheralded management decision to reassign him, the action of the Director-General was flawed by procedural irregularity."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; executive body; executive head; flaw; lack of evidence; misconduct; notice; organisation; period; procedural flaw; reassignment; report; satisfactory service; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 2223


    95th Session, 2003
    European Molecular Biology Laboratory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The fact that the Director-General [did not initiate] the appeal procedure invalidates the defendant's argument that internal remedies were not exhausted, although they should have been as required by article vii of the Tribunal's Statute. While it is regrettable that the case was never brought before the Joint Advisory Appeals Board, this does not prevent the Tribunal from ruling on the merits of the complaint, which has been filed within the applicable rules."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE TRIBUNAL'S STATUTE

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; executive head; formal requirements; good faith; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure; receivability of the complaint; refusal; staff member's duties;



  • Judgment 2222


    95th Session, 2003
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "Referring to the Tribunal's case law, in particular Judgments 70 and 1543, the defendant submits that the Tribunal's competence, ratione materiae, does not extend to disputes regarding the Director-General's discretion to waive diplomatic immunity. It is worth noting that the complainant does not in fact [...] challenge the decision to waive his diplomatic immunity in itself. He rather challenges the circumstances in which that decision was taken, which in his view violated his contractual rights or those arising from the general principles of law which should be observed by international organisations. Since the case law referred to by the defendant does not apply, the Tribunal is of the view that only a consideration of the merits of the case may show whether the complainant's allegations are well founded."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 70, 1543

    Keywords:

    breach; case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; decision; discretion; executive head; general principle; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; judicial review; organisation; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; right; terms of appointment; waiver of immunity;



  • Judgment 2216


    95th Session, 2003
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 8 and 9

    Extract:

    Article VI 1.01 of ESO's International Staff Rules reads as follows: " 'Every member of the personnel shall have the right to appeal against any decision of the Director General concerning himself.' Thus, a person who is not a "member of the personnel" has no right to launch an internal appeal and his or her only recourse is directly to the Tribunal."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE VI 1.01 OF ESO'S INTERNATIONAL STAFF RULES

    Keywords:

    cause of action; consequence; decision; direct appeal to tribunal; executive head; general principle; internal appeal; international civil servant; procedure; provision; right; right of appeal; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2198


    94th Session, 2003
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 12 and 13

    Extract:

    The complainant worked, from 1993 to 2000, under a series of short-term contracts of varying durations. "It was clearly within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide whether to renew the complainant's short-term contract or offer him a fixed-term contract. The complainant cannot now claim to be treated retroactively as if he had a fixed-term contract; he was at all times a short-term staff member (see, for example, Judgment 2107, under 10). [...] Precedent has it that, at the discretion of the executive head, a temporary appointment may be extended or converted to a fixed-term appointment, but it does not carry any expectation of, nor imply any right to, such extension or conversion and shall, unless extended or converted, expire according to its terms, without notice or indemnity (see, in particular, Judgment 1560, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1560, 2107

    Keywords:

    contract; discretion; duration of appointment; executive head; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; non-retroactivity; notice; right; short-term; successive contracts; terminal entitlements;



  • Judgment 2193


    94th Session, 2003
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had entered into a civil solidarity contract (pacte civil de solidaritÚ, hereinafter 'pacs') with his male partner, informed the administration that his partner was entirely dependent on him. The organisation replied that, under the rules currently applicable within the United Nations system, the pacs was not recognised as a formal marriage that could create an entitlement to any benefits or allowances for a dependent spouse. "The complainant submits that, since the Director-General is entitled to modify or create exceptions to the application of the Staff Rules, he could and ought to have made an exception in the present case or amended the disputed text in order to protect the rights of homosexuals. [...] However, irrespective of the validity of the arguments put forward in urging the Director-General to take individual choices into account in the context of a culture of tolerance compatible with changing moral beliefs, the Director-General cannot be compelled to resort to what is merely an option open to him under certain clearly defined circumstances, since exercising that option is entirely a matter of discretion."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; contract; dependant; discretion; domestic law; equal treatment; exception; executive head; family allowance; marital status; same-sex marriage; sex discrimination; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2175


    94th Session, 2003
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11c)

    Extract:

    "The complainant states that the Director-General based the decision not to renew his contract on the false assumption that he was using [his] project for self-enrichment purposes. If that were true, however, it would be grounds for immediate termination and not merely non-renewal of a fixed-term contract."

    Keywords:

    contract; decision; executive head; fixed-term; grounds; misconduct; mistake of fact; non-renewal of contract; termination; unjust enrichment;



  • Judgment 2138


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant requests that he be considered for a long- term contract. He "can take no comfort from the case of another staff member in a somewhat similar situation who was given a long-term contract [...] The awarding of such contracts is exceptional and wholly discretionary and the fact that a contract is granted to one staff member creates no rights for any other staff member."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; complainant; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; equal treatment; exception; executive head; international civil servant; request by a party; right; same;



  • Judgment 2125


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 5 and 6

    Extract:

    The complainant's request to have his contract extended beyond retirement age was not allowed. "On the merits, the Agency is undoubtedly right in pointing out that the Director General has discretion in the matter, over which the Tribunal has only a limited power of review. This discretion enables the Agency to depart from the rule governing the normal age of retirement. [...] Although the Director General can determine the interest of the Agency, his decisions must be based on clear and coherent reasons. In this case, the reason given - that the request for an extension contained no indication as to whether any of the criteria [on the basis of which he may authorise such an extension] had been satisfied - is not valid, and the reason based on 'rejuvenation' of the staff is too general to constitute a sufficient justification for the refusal of the complainant's request." The Tribunal considers that "this reason is not in itself reprehensible, but it could be used to justify a systematic refusal to depart from the rule governing the normal age of retirement. [By setting out the criteria] the [Agency] established for itself a number of rules which it must apply."

    Keywords:

    age limit; complaint allowed; contract; criteria; decision; definition; discretion; exception; executive head; extension; grounds; iloat; international civil servant; judicial review; organisation; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; patere legem; refusal; request by a party; retirement; written rule;

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


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top