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

Marital status (64, 643, 682,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Marital status
Total judgments found: 22

1, 2 | next >

  • Judgment 3203


    115th Session, 2013
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complaint is directed at the Secretary-General’s decision to refuse to recognise same-sex marriages.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "It is true that the case law of the Tribunal on the question of benefits for same-sex partners has developed in the last decade. This is illustrated by Judgment 2860. Indeed, there are opinions of individual judges concluding that staff rules denying access to dependency benefits to same-sex partners are unenforceable because they violate fundamental principles of law (see, for example, the dissenting opinion of Justice Hugessen in Judgment 2193)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2193, 2860

    Keywords:

    case law; definition; dependant; difference; enforcement; family allowance; interpretation; marital status; provision; same-sex marriage; social benefit; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 3080


    112th Session, 2012
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "[T]he case law of the Tribunal establishes that when the term "spouse" is used in an organisation's staff rules or regulations without being otherwise defined therein, it is not limited to individuals within a marriage but may also cover persons in other forms of union (see in particular Judgments 2760, under 4, and 2860, under 9). Thus, in several recent judgments concerning cases where the applicable provisions were couched in similar language, the Tribunal held that the organisations concerned had to recognise same-sex marriages (see Judgment 2590 or Judgment 2760 [...]) or unions in the form of registered partnerships when the relevant national law made it possible to consider persons in such unions as "spouses" (see Judgments 2549 and 2550, and Judgment 2860 [...])."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2549, 2550, 2590, 2760, 2860

    Keywords:

    applicable law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; domestic law; marital status; no provision; same-sex marriage; staff regulations and rules;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "[A] passing reference to "husband" or "wife" in the Staff Rules is not sufficient to warrant interpreting all the relevant provisions thereof as denying same-sex spouses the entitlements concerned (see Judgment 2590 [...], under 6)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2590

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; insurance benefit; interpretation; marital status; provision; same-sex marriage; social benefit; staff regulations and rules;

    Considerations 19 & 20

    Extract:

    "According to the Tribunal's case law, when an organisation is ordered to grant a financial benefit to a staff member who fulfilled the legal requirements for claiming it, but who failed to do so as soon as his/her entitlement arose, the benefit in question is due only as from the date of the initial claim by the person concerned, and not the date on which he/she became entitled to the benefit ([...] see Judgment 2550, under 6, or Judgment 2860, under 22). There would be no justification for ordering an organisation unexpectedly to pay potentially large, backdated, aggregated sums for benefits which had not been claimed by the staff member concerned when he or she should have done so. [...] [Moreover] it is true that the position would be different if the Organization itself were responsible for the fact that the [staff member] did not submit a claim [at that time]."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2550, 2860

    Keywords:

    amount; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; date; delay; exception; insurance benefit; judgment of the tribunal; liability; marital status; non-retroactivity; organisation; payment; request by a party; staff member's duties;



  • Judgment 3020


    111th Session, 2011
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    WTO Staff Rule 106.11 provides that "[n]ational income tax on salaries, allowances, indemnities or grants paid by the WTO shall be refunded to the staff member by the WTO." The complainant considers that her salary is indirectly taxed, because it is included in the assessment of her husband's rate of income tax. The Organization rejected her claims for reimbursement of what she describes as "over-taxation by the Swiss tax authorities". The Tribunal holds that "[t]he refusal to provide compensation for the additional amount of tax unfairly levied on the couple's income solely because of the complainant's earned income, although it was exempt from taxation, would have a paradoxical effect. A rule designed to guarantee equal wages would lead to unjustifiable inequality between an official whose earned income was unduly taxed although it was by law exempt from taxation and an official whose tax-exempt salary was taken into account for assessment purposes, thus reducing his/her spouse's disposable income after tax and therefore his/her economic capacity from which the official living with him/her naturally benefits. The impugned decision is therefore unlawful."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: WTO Staff Rule 106.11

    Keywords:

    allowance; breach; compensatory allowance; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; deduction; domestic law; effect; equal treatment; grounds; international civil servant; marital status; organisation; payment; purpose; rate; reckoning; recovery of overpayment; reduction; refund; refusal; request by a party; safeguard; salary; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; tax; written rule;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    WTO Staff Rule 106.11 provides that "[n]ational income tax on salaries, allowances, indemnities or grants paid by the WTO shall be refunded to the staff member by the WTO." The complainant considers that her salary is indirectly taxed, because it is included in the assessment of her husband's rate of income tax.
    "[T]here is no need to entertain the claim that the WTO should be ordered to 'employ its authority and power' to persuade the competent Swiss authorities to abandon the practice giving rise to this dispute, since the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to issue such an order."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: WTO Staff Rule 106.11

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; domestic law; marital status; order; ratione materiae; tax;



  • Judgment 2860


    107th Session, 2009
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9, 13, 17, 19 and 21

    Extract:

    The complainant, a French national, entered into a "Civil Solidarity Contract" (PACS) under French law with his same-sex partner. The FAO refused to recognise his partner as his dependent spouse for the purpose of dependency benefits.
    "The Tribunal rejects the FAO's assertion that under the Staff Regulations and Rules, the status of 'spouse' can only arise in the context of a marriage. It is now well established in the case law that, unless the term 'spouse' is otherwise defined in the staff regulations, it is not limited to individuals within a marriage. It may also arise from other types of unions. As the Tribunal observed in Judgment 2760, under 4, in the absence of a definition of 'spouse' in the relevant regulatory provisions, 'same-sex marriages' [...] or unions in the form of 'registered partnerships' [have] to be recognised by these organisations where the applicable national legislation enable[s] persons who ha[ve] contracted such unions to be regarded as 'spouses' (see Judgments 2549 and 2550)'. (See also Judgment 2643, under 6.)"
    "Accordingly, as the Tribunal also observed in Judgment 2549, under 11, it is necessary to determine whether in the light of the provisions of French law, the complainant and his partner should be considered as 'spouses' within the meaning of the FAO Staff Regulations and Rules."
    "[The materials of the file] demonstrate that just as in a marriage relationship, PACS partners are required to provide each other with financial support and are jointly liable for debts incurred for daily living. In matters such as immigration, social security, health insurance, home leave and relocation of civil servants, special leave for persons bound by a PACS, inheritance fees and income taxes, PACS partners are treated the same as spouses in a marriage. In a significant recent development, reference is made to the existence of the PACS and the name of the partners in the official register of personal status of individuals who have entered into a PACS, just as marital status is recorded for married persons."
    "Not only does a PACS change the legal status of the partners in relation to each other, but it also changes the legal status of the partners in relation to the State in a variety of ways enumerated earlier and in ways that mirror the status of married couples in relation to the State. Just as in a marriage, a PACS establishes a legal relationship of mutual dependence. Further, and at the very least, in the absence of a contrary provision in the Staff Regulations and Rules, the principle of non-discrimination requires that for the purposes of dependency benefits the term 'spouse' be interpretated as applicable to a relationship of mutual dependence under the relevant national law."
    "In conclusion, having regard to the materials filed in this proceeding, the Tribunal is satisfied that the provisions of French law give rise to a relationship of mutual dependence, and accordingly, the complainant and his partner must be regarded as 'spouses' under the Staff Regulations and Rules. In these circumstances, the Director-General erred in refusing to recognise the status of the complainant and his partner for the purpose of dependency benefits and, therefore, his decision will be set aside."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2549, 2550, 2643, 2760

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; dependant; domestic law; family allowance; marital status; same-sex marriage; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2847


    107th Session, 2009
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The purpose of the family allowances which Eurocontrol pays to officials with dependent children is to contribute financially towards these children's maintenance, and the aim of the rule laid down in [Article 67(2) of the Staff Regulations], according to which the amount of these allowances must be reduced by the amount of allowances of the same kind paid from other sources, such as family allowances paid by a national authority, is to prevent two benefits from being granted concurrently for the same children, since this would plainly result in the unlawful enrichment of the recipient family.
    In this regard, the fact that the [national authority] does not make payments to the official himself, but to his spouse (or, as in this case, his partner), is of course immaterial. If the two benefits in question are being paid for the maintenance of the same children, they cannot be drawn simultaneously by the parents without contravening the very purpose of this rule against concurrent benefits."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 67(2) of the Staff Regulations governing officials of the Eurocontrol Agency

    Keywords:

    accumulation; amount; breach; dependent child; domestic law; family allowance; marital status; parent; purpose; rate; same; staff regulations and rules; unjust enrichment; written rule;



  • Judgment 2839


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

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    "Upon being informed of the complainant's forthcoming marriage to the Director of her division, it was entirely proper for the Organization to consider whether the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules or its policy were engaged. It was equally proper to obtain advice on these matters. However, there was no need to canvas the views of some 40 staff members. [...] While properly structured consultations with staff through their association on matters of policy and regulations is appropriate, the canvassing of individual staff members in these circumstances was highly inappropriate and their individual views were irrelevant."

    Keywords:

    consultation; marital status; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2826


    107th Session, 2009
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "There was nothing to preclude the complainant from raising the argument based on the French text of the Staff Regulations in his first complaint. He was then armed with the recommendation and reasons of the Appeal Board, both of which were based on the English text of the relevant Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. Further, as he was then seeking recognition of his same-sex partner as a dependent spouse, it was for him to advance argument as to why that course should be taken rather than the more limited course recommended by the Appeal Board. Moreover, the grounds on which the Tribunal may review its judgments are limited to «failure to take account of some essential fact, a material error involving no value judgment, failure to rule on a claim, or the later discovery of some essential fact that the parties were unable to rely on in the original proceedings» (see Judgment 1252 and also Judgments 442, 555 and 649). The argument based on the French text is, in essence, an argument that the Tribunal erred in law in interpreting the ITU Staff Regulations and Staff Rules as barring recognition of the complainant's partner as his dependent spouse. That is not an admissible ground for the review of a judgment (see Judgment 2029). Nor is it a ground for review that, on 3 September 2007 and after Judgment 2643 was delivered, the complainant married his partner in British Columbia in accordance with the law of Canada. It would entirely defeat the principles of finality and res judicata if subsequent facts could be taken into account on an application for review of a judgment."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 442, 555, 649, 1252, 2029, 2643

    Keywords:

    application for review; dependant; finality of judgment; inadmissible grounds for review; language of rule; marital status; new fact on which the party was unable to rely in the original proceedings; res judicata; same-sex marriage;



  • Judgment 2760


    105th Session, 2008
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant, a Canadian national, married a person of the same sex, as she is permitted to do under the law in force in Canada. She immediately informed the Agency of her new marital status and applied for the dependency benefits to which staff members with a spouse are eligible, but her application was rejected. The defendant points out that, for the purpose of applying its Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, it has a definition of the term "spouse" which refers only to the partners of a union between persons of opposite sex, since the Guide to Dependency Benefits, which was drawn up for the staff, indicates that the term "'[s]pouse' for all purposes of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules is defined to mean the husband or wife". "But this mere information document, which was prepared by the Administration and has no normative value, clearly cannot prescribe the adoption of a restrictive definition which does not appear in the applicable texts themselves.
    Furthermore, while the Tribunal notes that the same definition was also given in a Notice to the Staff of 11 July 2005, that document likewise could not narrow the scope of the concept of 'spouse' to which the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules refer. Although the secretariat of an organisation may always circulate a Notice to the Staff to clarify certain provisions of its staff regulations and rules, such a notice cannot impose on staff any restrictive conditions other than those stipulated in the provisions themselves."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Guide to Dependency Benefits

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; applicable law; binding character; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; definition; dependant; domestic law; enforcement; family allowance; information note; limits; marital status; organisation; precedence of rules; provision; publication; purpose; refusal; request by a party; same; same-sex marriage; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 2643


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

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant, a British national, entered into a "Civil Solidarity Contract" (PACS) under French law with his same-sex partner and had his partnership registered under the Civil Partnership Act applicable to British citizens. The ITU refused to recognise his partner as his dependent spouse for determination of the benefits pertaining to that status. "The Tribunal has accepted in several recent judgments that same-sex marriages (see Judgment 2590) and unions taking the form of 'registered partnerships' must be recognised where the national legislation applicable to the staff member concerned allows persons who have contracted such unions to be treated as 'spouses' (see Judgments 2549 and 2550). The important difference between the present case and those previously decided lies in the fact that the ITU Staff Regulations and Staff Rules explicitly define the concept of spouses as denoting husband and wife in a large number of provisions, and that, contrary to the situations examined in Judgments 2549 and 2550, the ITU refuses to accept that same-sex unions lawfully contracted under the national legislation of the official concerned may be taken into consideration for the purpose of applying the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. It follows that the defendant was not wrong in asserting that, in the light of the case law and the applicable Regulations and Rules as they currently stand, the Secretary-General was barred from giving the term 'spouse' the broad interpretation requested."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2549, 2550, 2590

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; dependant; difference; domestic law; enforcement; family allowance; interpretation; judgment of the tribunal; marital status; provision; purpose; refusal; same; same-sex marriage; social benefit; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 2569


    102nd Session, 2007
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The vacancy notice of the post the complainant applied for stipulated that nationals of all Member States of CERN - including Switzerland - could apply. She was selected for the post but was dismissed after CERN discovered that in her application form she had stated that she held Swiss nationality whereas she had not yet acquired it. "[W]hile it is true that the fact that the complainant was married to a Swiss national should in principle have enabled her to obtain Swiss nationality under the 'facilitated naturalisation' procedure, it is equally true that at the time she filled out her application form she did not hold Swiss nationality and had not even applied for it. [...] By making a false declaration, the complainant was guilty of misconduct which, when it came to light after her recruitment, was sufficient to invalidate her appointment and to justify the imposition of a disciplinary sanction on the grounds that she fell short of the standards of loyalty and integrity that the Organization is entitled to expect of its staff. Although the complainant maintains that by imposing the disputed sanction the defendant breached the
    terms of her appointment and the applicable provisions of CERN’s Staff Rules and Regulations, she does not
    substantiate those allegations in any way, nor does she identify any breach of the rules of procedure followed by
    the Organization. The complaint must therefore be dismissed."

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; competition; date; disciplinary measure; marital status; member state; misconduct; misrepresentation; nationality; organisation; post; reinstatement; safeguard; staff member's duties; termination; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2549


    101st Session, 2006
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 10, 11 and 13

    Extract:

    The complainant, a Danish national, was employed by the ILO from 3 January 2002 to 2 January 2005. She had entered into a registered partnership with her same-sex partner. On taking up her functions, she submitted a Certificate of Registered Partnership drawn up in accordance with the Danish Act on registered partnership and asked to be granted dependency benefits, designating her partner as her spouse. Her request was rejected. The Office stated that it was "in a position to recognise same-sex marriages immediately where the legislation of the country of the staff member's nationality recognises such marriages." It has in fact recently recognised such same-sex marriages where the national legislation defines same-sex marriages as spousal relationships.
    "The question is whether the broad interpretation of the term 'spouse' already given by the Office in the case of a marriage recognised by the legislation of the country of the staff member's nationality should have been extended to unions between same-sex partners which are not expressly designated as marriages under the national law of the staff member concerned. The Tribunal feels that a purely nominalistic approach to this issue would be excessively formalistic and is inappropriate in view of the fact that the situation varies from one country to another and that great care must be taken not to treat officials placed in comparable situations unequally: it is not because a country has opted for legislation that admits same-sex unions while refusing to describe them as marriages that officials who are nationals of that State should necessarily be denied certain rights. As pointed out in Judgment 1715 [...], there may be situations in which the status of spouse can be recognised in the absence of a marriage, provided that the staff member concerned can show the precise provisions of local law on which he or she relies. It is therefore necessary to determine whether in the present case the provisions of Danish law enable the complainant and her partner to be considered as 'spouses' in the meaning of the applicable regulations."
    After having examined the provisions of the Danish Act on registered partnership, the Tribunal finds that "the Director-General was wrong [...] to refuse to recognise the status of spouse for the complainant's partner [and orders] the ILO [to] give full effect to this ruling by granting the complainant the benefits denied to her during the time of her employment".

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1715

    Keywords:

    analogy; applicable law; burden of proof; complaint allowed; condition; consequence; contract; declaration of recognition; definition; dependant; difference; domestic law; equal treatment; exception; executive head; family allowance; international civil servant; interpretation; judicial review; marital status; member state; nationality; provision; refusal; request by a party; right; same; same-sex marriage; social benefit; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2480


    100th Session, 2006
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 2 and 4

    Extract:

    The complainant takes issue with an ILO circular which concerned matrimonial property rights. It informed foreign nationals, like himself, who were married outside Switzerland with no marriage contract, that Switzerland was treating such persons as subject to the Swiss regime of joint ownership of property acquired after marriage (participation aux acquêts). He holds that by accepting such "instructions" from the Swiss Government, the Organization caused him undue financial hardship and "deep moral suffering". The Tribunal considers that the circular was "simply the transmission by the ILO to its staff members resident in Geneva of information received from the local 'Chambre des notaires'. [...] The publication by an international organisation for its staff members of purely objective information of this sort relating to local private law is manifestly not a matter falling within the Tribunal's field of competence."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ILO Circular No. 451, Series 6

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; domestic law; headquarters official; information note; international civil servant; marital status; material injury; moral injury; nationality; organisation; publication; written rule;



  • 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 solidarité, 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;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had entered into a civil solidarity contract (pacte civil de solidarité, hereinafter 'pacs') with his male partner, informed the administration that his partner was entirely dependant 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 Tribunal shares the view that the organization "is not bound by contracts entered into under national laws".

    Keywords:

    contract; dependant; domestic law; family allowance; marital status; organisation's duties; same-sex marriage; sex discrimination;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had entered into a civil solidarity contract (pacte civil de solidarité, hereinafter 'pacs') with his male partner, informed the administration that his partner was entirely dependant 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 Tribunal states that "neither the letter nor the spirit of the relevant texts cited by the parties, nor indeed the case law, enable partners bound by a pacs to be considered as having the status of spouses within the meaning of Staff Rule 103.9."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 103.9

    Keywords:

    applicable law; case law; contract; dependant; domestic law; family allowance; interpretation; marital status; organisation's duties; same-sex marriage;



  • Judgment 1715


    84th Session, 1998
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "In order to be a 'dependent spouse' someone must be not only the dependant but also the 'spouse' of the staff member. As a general rule, and in the absence of a definition of the term, the status of spouse will flow from a marriage publicly performed and certified by an official of the State where the ceremony has taken place, such marriage being then proved by the production of an official certificate. The Tribunal accepts, however, that there may be de facto situations, of which 'traditional' marriages are examples, and which some States recognise as creating the status of 'spouse'. In each such case where there is no definition of 'spouse' it will be up to the staff member to prove not only the existence of the relevant fact but also the precise provisions of local law which give it consequences and the exact nature of those consequences, and he must show that such law is applicable in the context of the Organisation's Staff Regulations and Rules."

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; definition; dependant; domestic law; evidence; marital status; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 978


    66th Session, 1989
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    unesco staff rule 031.14 (b) (iii) formerly provided that "the non-resident's allowance shall not be paid, or shall cease to be paid, to a staff member [...] whose husband is a national of the country of the duty station" inasmuch as the word "husband" prevents the rule from applying to staff members whose wives are in the same situation, the provision is discriminatory and the impugned decision, which was based on the discriminatory provision, must therefore be quashed.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: FORMER UNESCO STAFF RULE 103.14 (B) (III)

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; complaint allowed; decision quashed; equal treatment; flaw; local status; marital status; non-local status; non-resident allowance; provision; sex discrimination; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 944


    65th Session, 1988
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    the complainant and her husband are both officials of the epo. there are no rules concerning the refund of medical expenses which cover such contingencies. the tribunal holds that "no other provision of the service regulations may be applied, even by analogy, if intended to fit an essentially different set of circumstances."

    Keywords:

    analogy; applicable law; enforcement; insurance benefit; marital status; no provision; other; provision; staff regulations and rules;

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    the internal appeal was signed by mr. [e.] whereas the complaint is signed by mr. [e.]'s wife. "there being no need for a ruling of general purport on the issue, the tribunal holds that in the circumstances of the case the complaint may be deemed receivable. [...] the complainant's husband, [...] like her, is an official of the epo; they concur on the material issue and the purpose of the suit relates to a matter of social security for spouses".

    Keywords:

    complainant; complaint; difference; exception; family relationship; internal appeal; locus standi; marital status; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 927


    65th Session, 1988
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    Before the complainant's divorce during a period of trial separation, the organization discontinued payment of her family allowance and lowered the rate of her non-resident allowance. The Tribunal holds that "the temporary separation of the spouses prior to the decree of divorce, though authorised by a court order, was neither a 'legal' separation nor a 'similar legal situation' within the meaning of R IV 1.13 [of the Staff Rules and Regulations]. The trial separation is a preliminary to divorce required by law. It is limited in time and revocable. It has no effect on the marital status of the spouses, who may use it as they will. It is not in the same category as legal separation, which is a permanent solution." Since the organization made a mistake of law, the Director-General's decision must be set aside.

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R IV 1.13 OF THE CERN STAFF RULES

    Keywords:

    allowance; complaint allowed; consequence; decision quashed; domestic law; family allowance; flaw; interpretation; marital status; non-resident allowance;



  • Judgment 463


    46th Session, 1981
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 5 and 6

    Extract:

    the complainant did not submit a copy of his marriage certificate until one month after he was terminated. but the organization was aware of the fact that the complainant had a wife and child. the only material fact is that he is married, whatever the date on which he produced the required evidence. the application of a provision on family benefit is not relevant: the two matters are basically distinct. in the present case, the amount due should be calculated according to the rate provided for officials with dependants.

    Keywords:

    allowance; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; delay; dependant; disclosure of evidence; marital status; rate; terminal entitlements;



  • Judgment 319


    39th Session, 1977
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Summary

    Extract:

    when she was recruited, the complainant had local status. she later married, acquired a new nationality by naturalisation and lost her original nationality. the tribunal holds that her status is dependent on her nationality at the time of appointment. according to the relevant provisions, a change of nationality does not in itself entail a change in status. the complainant is not entitled to the benefits provided for officials who leave their own country to live in another. the complaint is dismissed.

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; appointment; consequence; local status; marital status; nationality; non-local status;



  • Judgment 168


    25th Session, 1970
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    the complainant lost her non-local status, which was linked to nationality, through marriage. in contesting the validity of the newly applied rule, she alleges "sex discrimination, category discrimination [and] lack of agreement with the staff council... the tribunal holds that, even if the allegation was well founded in fact, it would not affect the validity of [the rule] inasmuch as the director-general by making the rule would not be exceeding the powers conferred upon him under ... the general rules of the organization."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; equal treatment; local status; marital status; nationality; non-local status; provision; sex discrimination; staff regulations and rules;

1, 2 | next >


 
Last updated: 12.08.2019 ^ top