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

Exemplary damages (689,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Exemplary damages
Total judgments found: 4

  • Judgment 4181


    128th Session, 2019
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the failure by the ICC to complete his performance appraisal in conformity with the applicable statutory provisions.

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    [The complainant] has provided no evidence or analysis to demonstrate that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith or other improper purpose on which to base an award of exemplary damages (see, for example, Judgment 3419, under 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3419

    Keywords:

    exemplary damages;



  • Judgment 3419


    119th Session, 2015
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal found that the complainant was entitled to moral damages for identified errors of the Administration.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant also claims exemplary damages, in addition to compensation for moral damages, on the ground that he suffered malice, bias and harassment by the Administration. The Tribunal considers this claim to be unsustainable as the complainant has provided no evidence or analysis to demonstrate that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith or other improper purpose on which to base an award of exemplary damages (see, for example, Judgments 3092, under 16, and 3286, under 27).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3092, 3286

    Keywords:

    exemplary damages;



  • Judgment 3092


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

    Considerations 16 to 18

    Extract:

    With respect to the claim for exemplary damages, the Tribunal notes that in general these awards are meant to sanction bias, ill will, malice, bad faith, and other improper purpose. Although the complainant broadly alleges bias, conflict of interest, malice, bad faith, and other improper motivation in her pleadings, she does not separately analyse the grounds upon which an award of exemplary damages could rest. In Judgment 2762 involving similar allegations, under 25, the Tribunal held that:
    “the main thrust of the complaint is the allegation of abuse of authority, conflict of interest, bias and bad faith […]. At this juncture, it should be noted that in the complainant’s submissions there is no separate analysis for each of these allegations. Instead, the complainant uses the terms almost interchangeably. For the purpose of this discussion, it is not necessary to engage in a separate legal analysis for each of the allegations.”
    Further, in Judgment 2293, under 12, the Tribunal noted:
    “Although to act in bad faith is always to mismanage, the reverse is not the case and honest mistakes or even sheer stupidity will not, without more, be enough. Bad faith requires an element of malice, ill will, improper motive, fraud or similar dishonest purpose.”
    In the present case, a review of the overall procedure and the Administration’s specific decisions and conduct, which the complainant alleges demonstrate improper purposes or motives, are equally amenable to explanations that do not involve bad faith, but rather a lack of diligence in processing the claim in a timely manner. Accordingly, the Tribunal concludes that an award of exemplary damages is not warranted in the circumstances.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2293, 2762

    Keywords:

    bad faith; exemplary damages;



  • Judgment 2540


    101st Session, 2006
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 27

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal is obliged to note that it is a most serious breach of the rights of international civil servants to take retaliatory action simply because they have pursued an internal appeal. International civil servants - no matter how high their rank is - cannot protect their rights in national tribunals. Their only recourse is through the mechanisms established by the relevant Staff Rules. To punish a person because he or she has had resort to those mechanisms is a gross abuse of power warranting an award of substantial exemplary damages".

    Keywords:

    amount; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; disciplinary measure; exemplary damages; hidden disciplinary measure; internal appeal; international civil servant; misuse of authority; municipal court; organisation's duties; right; right of appeal;


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top