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 2107


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The complainant's claim that he should be considered as a fixed-term staff member cannot be sustained. The complainant was recruited as a short-term staff member, without having to go through a competition process; he accepted several contract renewals. It was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide during the years that the complainant was with the organization whether to renew each short-term contract or offer him a fixed-term contract. There is no basis on which the complainant can claim to be treated retroactively as if he had a fixed-term contract. He was at all times a short-term staff member."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; claim; competition; complainant; contract; decision; discretion; executive head; fixed-term; international civil servant; non-retroactivity; participation; refusal; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2092


    92nd Session, 2002
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "When the executive head of an organisation accepts and adopts the recommendations of an internal appeal body he is under no obligation to give any further reasons than those given by the appeal body itself. Where, however, [...] he rejects those recommendations his duty to give reasons is not fulfilled by simply saying that he does not agree with the appeal body."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; advisory opinion; complaint allowed in part; decision; difference; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; grounds; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; recommendation; refusal; report;



  • 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 2080


    92nd Session, 2002
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 14 and 15

    Extract:

    "The Director-General, in exercise of his discretionary authority and taking into account the overall interests of the organisation, decided that the [complainant's] post [...] should be redefined and that [his] contract should not be renewed. The Tribunal accepts that the organisation was entitled to adapt to changes and to modify the job description for the given post in view of the organisation's future needs."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; contract; decision; discretion; executive head; non-renewal of contract; organisation; organisation's interest; post description; post held by complainant; reorganisation; right;

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The complainant's contract was not renewed upon expiry. "Interim Staff Rule 4.4.02(b) provides that separation as a result of the expiration of an appointment shall not be regarded as a termination [...] Rule 9.1.01(b) defines termination [...] as any separation initiated by the Director-General, other than the expiration of a contract. Therefore, the question of any termination indemnity payable to the complainant does not arise."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: OPCW INTERIM STAFF RULE 4.4.02(B), OPCW INTERIM STAFF RULE 9.1.01(B)

    Keywords:

    consequence; contract; decision; definition; difference; executive head; international civil servant; non-renewal of contract; provision; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements; termination;



  • Judgment 2074


    91st Session, 2001
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    The complainant applied for a post but was not selected. "The complainant claims the right of preference which is accorded, when candidates are equally competent, to internal applicants [...] In view of its objective, which is to secure the best possible employees for an organisation, equality of competence applies to all the abilities required of an employee, both professional and personal. The Secretary-General did not overstep his discretionary authority by concluding that the overall aptitude of the candidates was not equal. The plea must therefore fail."

    Keywords:

    candidate; competition; condition; discretion; executive head; internal candidate; no cause of action; organisation's interest; purpose; qualifications; refusal; right; same;



  • Judgment 2065


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

    Considerations 4 and 5

    Extract:

    "In this application the complainant is challenging the decision of 31 August 2000 [...] However, the President's new decision of 11 April 2001 [...] has deprived the application of a cause of action. Since he claims costs, it must be determined whether the complainant did have a cause of action at the time of filing this application on 11 October 2000."

    Keywords:

    application for execution; cause of action; claim; costs; date; decision; executive head; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 2027


    90th Session, 2001
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "Eurocontrol contends that the complaint is irreceivable because the "decision" to transfer him was not a real decision coming from an appointing authority, thus, he fails to show injury and has no cause of action. The objections to receivability fail. Even a simple measure on a matter of internal reorganisation such as transfer may sometimes impair the staff member's rights and legitimate interests (see Judgment 1078 [...] among others)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1078

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; cause of action; complaint allowed in part; decision; executive head; grounds; injury; lack of injury; reassignment; receivability of the complaint; reorganisation; right; staff member's interest; transfer;



  • Judgment 2025


    90th Session, 2001
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    The complaint was transferred to the field against his liking. At the end of the internal procedure, the organisation decided to reassign him to Headquarters. "It thereby admitted [...] that it had failed to assess the complainant's circumstances with the care required by administrative decisions that affect its staff. That in itself warrants the conclusion that, even though his assignment [to Headquarters] met the complainant's wishes in part, it did not fully make up for the injury caused by his transfer [to the field]. Consequently [...] the Director-General was wrong not to award him the compensation he had claimed."

    Keywords:

    compensation; complaint allowed in part; executive head; field; headquarters; injury; internal appeal; organisation's duties; reassignment; refusal; request by a party; transfer;



  • Judgment 2024


    90th Session, 2001
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The decision of the President of the European Patent Office complies with the requests the complainant had made in her internal appeals. "Therefore, the complainant has received satisfaction and shows no cause of action with respect to the impugned decision."

    Keywords:

    cause of action; decision; executive head; internal appeal; lack of injury; request by a party;



  • Judgment 2018


    90th Session, 2001
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 14 and 15

    Extract:

    The complainant attacks the decision not to confirm his appointment after a probationary period and to terminate his employment prior to the expiry of his fixed-term contract. "The Tribunal [...] notes that [...] the organisation's legal division advised the administration of the procedure to be followed in terminating the complainant's appointment. Specifically [...] the administration was advised of its obligation to set up a special advisory board to investigate the case and to report back to the Director-General. This advice, like the [...] findings of the Special Advisory Board, appear inexplicably to have been simply ignored by the Director-General. In the circumstances, the impugned decision [...] must be quashed."

    Keywords:

    advisory body; advisory opinion; complaint allowed in part; confirmation of appointment; contract; decision quashed; executive head; fixed-term; organisation's duties; probation; procedure; refusal; termination;



  • Judgment 1973


    89th Session, 2000
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal has always held that personal promotion constitutes advancement on merit to reward someone for services of a quality higher than that ordinarily expected of the holder of the post. The granting of personal promotion is a discretionary decision which, as firm precedent has it, is subject to only limited review and will stand unless it shows a fatal flaw. In a case such as the present one, in which the general rules regarding personal promotions have been adopted and communicated to the staff, the appointing authority is bound by these rules and the Tribunal will consider any violation of them to be a fatal flaw."

    Keywords:

    breach; case law; discretion; executive head; flaw; judicial review; limits; patere legem; personal promotion; promotion;



  • Judgment 1972


    89th Session, 2000
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 3 and 4

    Extract:

    The complainant, a director of a department, was made aware of two e-mails which were written in highly indecorous terms and, although private, commented on the running of the department. The Staff Union Committee protested against what it considered to be an invasion of privacy. The complainant did not respect the order to use discretion issued by the Director of Personnel. The Director-General, considering the complainant incapable in his function as Director of a department to maintain a stable and productive working environment, transferred him to a post of special advisor. "As the Tribunal held in Judgment 1018 [...], it is the duty of the head of any international organisation to take whatever measures can reduce tensions among his staff, and a transfer in the interests of the service may be an appropriate way of settling a conflictual situation. [...] However, since it cannot be regarded as disciplinary, the measure must, as the case law prescribes, heed the staff member's dignity and good name and not cause him undue suffering. Clearly, in this case the complainant was bound to view the measure as downgrading him. However, the fact that the organization was at pains to find him an assignment in keeping with his competence if not his wishes, to maintain his grade and to exercise the utmost discretion in dealing with the matter, shows that everything was done to protect his dignity as a senior official."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1018

    Keywords:

    conduct; discretion; downgrading; executive head; hidden disciplinary measure; organisation's interest; respect for dignity; transfer; working relations;



  • Judgment 1968


    89th Session, 2000
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 17 and 18

    Extract:

    "In the present case, the President sought, but failed to obtain, the Promotion Board's approval for his proposal to promote Mr C. While the President clearly has a residual discretion not to make promotions which the Board recommends, he may only make promotions in accordance with the Board's recommendations. Since the Board declined to recommend Mr C. for promotion, his promotion was irregular. [...] Furthermore, as the appointing authority, it was clearly inappropriate for the President, having urged the Promotion Board to treat Mr C. as a special case, to then disregard the Board's refusal to recommend the promotion. The decision cannot stand."

    Keywords:

    advisory opinion; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; discretion; exception; executive head; flaw; promotion; promotion board; refusal;



  • Judgment 1834


    86th Session, 1999
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "The complainant [pleads] that the decision to terminate [her appointment] was not 'initiated' by the Director-General, as Staff Rule 110.04 required. [I]n the context of the Staff Rule the word 'initiated' does not mean that the Director-General himself must be the first person in the administration to take any action at all; it simply requires that the action, when taken, be on the Director-General's behalf and with his prior approval."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: UNIDO STAFF RULE 110.04

    Keywords:

    competence; decision; decision-maker; delegated authority; executive head; organisation's duties; termination;



  • Judgment 1814


    86th Session, 1999
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "Though the Director General does have discretion [as to who may be considered as a dependent child], the staff member must be made aware of any criteria he is applying." (See Judgment 1204.)

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1204

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; criteria; dependant; dependent child; discretion; duty to inform; executive head; family allowance; limits; organisation's duties; parent;



  • Judgment 1781


    85th Session, 1998
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    The complainant submitted that the Director-General had verbally promised him three step increments at his grade. On the evidence there is no denial by the Director-General on that point. The Tribunal holds that: "While the Director-General may communicate within the Organization through others acting on his behalf, the best evidence available must be offered in proceedings before the Tribunal. In this instance it would have been direct denial by the Director-General himself."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; disclosure of evidence; evidence; executive head; lack of evidence; promise;



  • Judgment 1771


    85th Session, 1998
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2 (c)

    Extract:

    "The complainant applies for an expert enquiry to determine whether she is fit for the duties of the post. Firm precedent has it that an executive head must be allowed discretion to determine what services the Organisation needs and whether someone is able to provide them, and that the Tribunal may exercise only a limited power of review over decisions on such matters. To allow the complainant's application for expert inquiry would be to assume that the Tribunal might replace the Director General's assessment of her with its own and would be alien to the notion of limited review [...]."

    Keywords:

    case law; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; discretion; executive head; expert inquiry; judicial review; qualifications; refusal;



  • Judgment 1659


    83rd Session, 1997
    European Free Trade Association
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "The defendant strongly objects to the complainants' producing privileged documents which it says they should never have disclosed without leave from the Secretary-General and which should therefore be discounted. The complainants explain that when still on the staff they were regularly sent such documents. So it is hard to see what is wrong with their relying thereon in pleadings that are confidential anyway."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; evidence; executive head; iloat; submissions;



  • Judgment 1617


    82nd Session, 1997
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "On the strength of the unfavourable appraisal non-renewal of her appointment may have seemed too harsh for someone who until then had had good reports which offered hope of improvement. So the [Organization] concluded that the right expedient was to give a shorter extension so that she might show her mettle. In coming to those conclusions on the evidence before him the Director-General did not go beyond the bounds of his discretion".

    Keywords:

    contract; different appraisals; discretion; duration of appointment; executive head; extension; non-renewal of contract; proportionality; staff member's interest; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 1616


    82nd Session, 1997
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The provisions of the combined [Staff] Rules apply to international and local staff alike, and so any provision that applies to one category of staff and not to the other offends against those rules and is unlawful. Here the Director General had no authority to treat as a mere option the consultation of the Joint Board on Appeals from local staff: the combined [Staff] Rules apply to all staff and so does the duty those rules lay down. The rule under which the Director General exercised discretion was an unlawful one and he thereby committed a mistake of law."

    Keywords:

    advisory body; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consultation; decision quashed; discretion; executive head; local status; non-local status; precedence of rules; staff regulations and rules;

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


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top