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

Moral damages (692,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Moral damages
Total judgments found: 42

1, 2, 3 | next >

  • Judgment 4808


    137th Session, 2024
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the outcome of the investigation procedure conducted in respect of her harassment grievance and the resulting lack of compensation.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; harassment; moral damages;

    Considerations 9-11, 14 & 17

    Extract:

    The Tribunal [...] notes that, in the impugned decision, the Director-General did not properly analyse whether or not it was appropriate to provide compensation for the moral injury suffered by the complainant as a victim of the harassment identified by the investigator in her report and recognized by the Organization. In so doing, the Director-General acted in breach of [the] provisions [which] established the complainant’s right to obtain explanations concerning compensation measures that may have been imposed taking into account the harassment identified in the investigation report; however, the Director-General did not attempt such explanations in the impugned decision. [...]
    In this regard, the Tribunal notes that the Director-General’s comments in the impugned decision concerning the disciplinary actions or corrective measures that could not be taken due to the retirement of Mr N. and Ms D. did not relate to compensation for the victim of the harassment, namely the complainant.
    Furthermore, the Tribunal notes that the Director-General appears to have considered that the payment of benefits received by the complainant under Annex II to the Staff Regulations, further to the recognition of the health problems from which she suffered as a result of the harassment as a service-incurred illness, covered all the injury suffered by the complainant. However, such benefits are not intended to cover the moral injury resulting from this harassment.
    The Tribunal further notes that the Director-General’s other comment contained in the impugned decision, that the investigation report would help in some measure to bring the matter to a close, did not, in the circumstances of the case, constitute adequate compensation.
    With regard to the Director-General’s comment that, if the complainant required any further support or assistance he encouraged her to make her needs known to HRD, this also was not compensation. [...] The Organization adds that, where a right to
    compensation exists, express provision is made in the relevant texts. However, it contends that there is no express provision requiring the Director-General to award financial compensation in the procedure for the administrative resolution of harassment grievances.
    The Tribunal cannot accept the defendant’s reading of the relevant provisions, which provide expressly for the right to redress of a staff member subjected to harassment and require the Director-General to consider the applicable remedies in a situation where harassment is recognized. The assertion that no express provision requires the Director-General to grant financial compensation is based on a confusion between the right to redress and the nature of the relief that could be awarded. While it is true that redress does not automatically imply the award of financial compensation and that, in some cases, measures other than the payment of a sum of money may prove adequate, the fact remains that the Organization ought first to have determined the appropriate redress for the complainant in the circumstances of the case, which it did not properly do.
    Furthermore, in Judgment 4602, considerations 14 and 16, the Tribunal recalled that, even in a situation where no provision in the internal regulations, rules or policies directly provides for the possibility of a compensation to victims of harassment, its case law clearly recognizes the right to such compensation when properly supported:
    “14. Notwithstanding this, the Tribunal considers that the WTO’s assertion, to the effect that no provision in the internal regulations, rules or policies directly provides for the possibility of a compensation to the individuals who filed a harassment complaint, is in tension with and indeed ignores its rather clear case law which recognises the right to such compensation when properly supported. In Judgment 4207, consideration 15, adopted by all seven judges, the Tribunal wrote the following on this issue:
    ‘It is observed that there are no specific provisions in the IAEA’s Staff Regulations and Staff Rules that articulate a comprehensive procedure to deal with a claim of harassment of the type first discussed in the preceding consideration. In the absence of a lawful comprehensive procedure within the IAEA’s Staff Regulations and Staff Rules to deal with a claim of harassment, the IAEA had to respond to the complainant’s claim of harassment in accordance with the Tribunal’s relevant case law. It is well settled in the case law that an international organization has a duty to provide a safe and adequate working environment for its staff members (see Judgment 2706, consideration 5, citing Judgment 2524). As well, ‘given the serious nature of a claim of harassment, an international organization has an obligation to initiate the investigation itself [...]’ (see Judgment 3347, consideration 14). Moreover, the investigation must be initiated promptly, conducted thoroughly and the facts must be determined objectively and in their overall context. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, the complainant is entitled to a response from the Administration regarding the claim of harassment. Additionally, as the Tribunal held in Judgment 2706, consideration 5, ‘an international organisation is liable for all the injuries caused to a staff member by their supervisor acting in the course of his or her duties, when the victim is subjected to treatment that is an affront to his or her personal and professional dignity’ (see also Judgments 1609, consideration 16, 1875, consideration 32, and 3170, consideration 33). Thus, an international organization must take proper actions to protect a victim of harassment.’ These principles have been recognized by the Tribunal’s case law in a number of situations before that Judgment 4207 (see, for example, Judgments 3995, consideration 9, and 3965, considerations 9 and 10) as well as after that Judgment 4207 (see, for example, Judgments 4547, consideration 3, and 4541, consideration 4).
    [...]
    16. The Tribunal observes that the WTO’s position is not that victims of harassment are not entitled to compensation. It rather argues that relief must be confined to compensation for the injury caused and that a finding of an unlawful act does not in itself establish a sufficient ground for compensation. The Tribunal in fact understands from the assertions contained in the WTO’s pleadings that the Organization recognizes the complainant’s strong emotions in relation to her request for additional compensation and does not wish, by its contestation, to belittle her feelings in this regard in any way. The WTO emphasizes, however, that any requests for additional compensation sought by the complainant must still meet the applicable legal requirements. On this matter, the Tribunal’s case law indicates that any complainant seeking compensation for material or moral damages must provide clear evidence of the injury suffered, of the alleged unlawful act, and of the causal link between the injury and the unlawful act (see, for instance, Judgments 4158, consideration 4, 3778, consideration 4, 2471, consideration 5, 1942, consideration 6, and 732, consideration 3), and that it is the complainant who bears the burden of proof in this respect (see Judgments 4158, consideration 4, 4157, consideration 7, and 4156, consideration 5).”
    The general principle that “an international organisation is liable for all the injuries caused to a staff member by their supervisor [...] when the victim is subjected to treatment that is an affront to his or her personal and professional dignity”, asserted in Judgment 2706, consideration 5, and reiterated in the aforementioned Judgment 4207, applies all the more with regard to the measures to be considered by the executive head in a harassment situation (see also, on this subject, Judgments 4217, consideration 9, and 4171, consideration 11).
    Lastly, in Judgment 4299, consideration 5, the Tribunal recalled the following in a case where a staff member alleged to have been harassed and requested compensation:
    “It is true that a staff member who has, in the latter situation just discussed, established she or he has been harassed may also be entitled to an award of moral damages by the organization for the harassment (see, for example, Judgment 4158, consideration 3). Whether there is such an entitlement may depend on the terms of the regime in place within the organization to deal with harassment grievances. It is certainly something that can be awarded in proceedings in the Tribunal (see Judgment 4241, considerations 24 and 25). However, what is important is that, even if moral damages might be awarded, that is a subsidiary remedy or relief available in cases of this type when harassment is established. As just discussed, the primary obligation of the organization if harassment is proved is to protect the complainant and prevent further harassment.”
    In a situation similar to that of the complainant in the present case, the Tribunal’s case law recognizes that it is the responsibility of the organization that establishes the existence of harassment to redress the injury caused and that, ordinarily, this redress should take the form of monetary compensation for the injury suffered (see, on this subject, Judgment 4158, consideration 3).
    [I]t is true that redress for injury suffered by the victim of harassment may, in certain cases, take forms other than monetary compensation [...].
    [...]
    The Tribunal considers that the complainant has duly established the moral injury she has suffered as a result of the harassment recognized in the investigation report. Since the main factor in the recognition of harassment is the perception that the person concerned may reasonably and objectively have of repeated acts or remarks liable to demean or humiliate them (see, for example, Judgment 4541, consideration 8), the complainant could legitimately, as she maintains, have felt demeaned by the actions of Mr N., and she could have felt that the latter was creating a hostile working environment in her regard, and thus have suffered substantial moral injury (see the aforementioned Judgment 4541, consideration 8).
    [...]
    [T]he Tribunal has repeatedly recognized the right of a staff member to the payment of monetary compensation for the moral injury suffered as a result of harassment and the resultant affront to her or his dignity (see, for example, Judgments 4663, considerations 17 and 20, 4241, considerations 24 and 25, 4217, consideration 9, and 3995, consideration 9).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1609, 1875, 2524, 2706, 3170, 3347, 3995, 4158, 4207, 4217, 4241, 4541, 4547, 4602, 4663

    Keywords:

    compensation; harassment; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4804


    137th Session, 2024
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject his appeal seeking, in the main, moral damages for breach of confidentiality and defamation.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    [E]ven though the breach of confidentiality is proven (as it has been acknowledged by the EPO), there is no evidence that the complainant suffered any damage as a result of that breach. Considering all the facts and relevant circumstances of the present case, […] the Tribunal finds that the complainant’s request for damages is unsubstantiated.

    Keywords:

    breach of confidentiality; burden of proof; confidentiality; moral damages; moral injury;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The Tribunal’s consistent case law holds that the amount of compensation for unreasonable delay in internal proceedings will ordinarily be influenced by at least two considerations. One is the length of the delay and the other is the effect of the delay. These considerations are interrelated as a lengthy delay may have a greater effect. That latter consideration, the effect of the delay, will usually depend on, amongst other things, the subject matter of the appeal (see Judgments 4563, consideration 14, and 3160, considerations 16 and 17).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3160, 4563

    Keywords:

    delay in internal procedure; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 4801


    137th Session, 2024
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the appointment of the Principal Director of Human Resources.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    Insofar as moral damages are concerned, she simply asserts in her brief that she seeks such damages ‘for the injustice and personal harm caused by the clearly discriminatory underevaluation of the Complainant’s professional experience in order to favor [the new Principal Director of Human Resources]’. Beyond this broad statement, there is no specification of the moral injury caused by the appointment nor evidence supporting its existence. These matters precondition the award of moral damages (see, for example, Judgment 4644, consideration 7).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4644

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 4776


    137th Session, 2024
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close his harassment complaint after a preliminary review.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The complainant seeks moral damages for reasons including the failure to carry out a formal investigation, the long duration of the preliminary investigation, the effect of the harassment and abuse of authority on his health, his professional career, reputation and personal life. This last-mentioned claim is based on the premise that he was the subject of harassment and abuse of authority. This is untested and unproved. As to the other aspects of his claim for moral damages, their foundation is simply asserted and not proved. This is insufficient (see, for example, Judgment 4644, consideration 7).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4644

    Keywords:

    investigation; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4762


    137th Session, 2024
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The complainant [...] seeks moral damages for the length it has taken for the initial harassment claim of Ms B. to be investigated and resolved by a final decision of the Executive Director, a period of almost two and half years. The moral injury asserted by the complainant is simply described as unnecessary anguish, stress and reputational damage. While it can be assumed his dismissal might have had this effect, it is not self-evidently so in relation to the time complained of by him. The complainant bears the burden of proving moral injury and a causal relationship between that and the event complained of but has not done so in this case (see, for example, Judgment 4644, consideration 7).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4644

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 4756


    137th Session, 2024
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to conduct an investigation into his allegation of breach of confidentiality and to deny his request for compensation.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The Tribunal has addressed the issue of the IAEA’s duty to maintain the confidentiality of a staff member’s personnel information, as stated in Judgment 4012, consideration 3:
    “[T]he filing of confidential personnel information in a publicly accessible email folder constituted a breach of the Organization’s duty to maintain the confidentiality of a staff member’s personnel information. The complainant, however, did not suffer any damage because of this breach. Leaving aside the fact that the complainant did not submit any evidence whatsoever let alone evidence establishing damage to his reputation or otherwise [...] As soon as the emails were located, they were immediately removed. Taking this into account, there will be no award of moral damages for the breach.”
    The filing of the letter of 11 November 2016, which contained confidential information, in electronic folders accessible to all staff members constituted a breach of the organization’s duty to maintain the confidentiality of a staff member’s personnel information. In the present case, however, the Director, Division of Human Resources (MTHR) took immediate steps to remedy the design flaw in the ERMS thereby preventing the document from being accessible. The IAEA’s Livelink platform was upgraded to eliminate the risk of such a flaw occurring in the future. In these circumstances, the complainant has not submitted evidence establishing damage to his reputation or other injury arising out of the temporary accessibility of the above-mentioned letter. As the complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence in support of his claim for damages, this request must be rejected.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4012

    Keywords:

    confidentiality; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4739


    137th Session, 2024
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the Global Fund’s decision to close his harassment complaint and not to provide him with a copy of the investigation report.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    Since the complainant was denied due process in the internal appeal and was unlawfully deprived of the possibility of effectively challenging the findings of the investigation in the internal appeal process, he will be awarded moral damages in the amount of 15,000 euros.

    Keywords:

    due process; internal appeal; moral damages;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    As regards the complainant’s claim for moral damages for the injury he suffered as a consequence of the alleged harassment and for the Global Fund’s refusal to take adequate action to follow up on his harassment complaint, the Tribunal notes two things. First, no award of moral damages can be made in the absence of a conclusive finding as to whether the alleged harassment actually took place or not. Second, the Global Fund actually did take action, and did so soon after the harassment complaint was submitted, by removing the complainant from the Chief Risk Officer’s supervision and by assigning him to a position under a different reporting line.

    Keywords:

    harassment; injury; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4691


    136th Session, 2023
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close his complaint of harassment and abuse of authority.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    [T]he complainant is entitled to moral damages for the moral injury he undoubtedly suffered as a result of the unlawful peremptory rejection of his complaint of harassment and particularly, abuse of authority and retribution about which, at this time, he obviously felt extremely strongly.

    Keywords:

    harassment; investigation; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4690


    136th Session, 2023
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to uphold his transfer to Budapest.

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The complainant has been represented by experienced counsel who has attested to the complainant’s pleas. It is true that the complainant seeks, but only by way of relief nominated in the complaint form and at the conclusion of the brief by way of summary, 300,000 euros as exemplary damages. In general, these damages are meant to sanction bias, ill will, malice, bad faith, and other improper purpose (see, for example, Judgment 3092, consideration 16). However, in his pleas (both in his brief and rejoinder) the complainant makes no submission at all about exemplary damages, and he confines his submissions to moral damages. The two are different. Moral damages are to compensate for a moral injury. Exemplary damages are awarded as a sanction for the defendant organisation’s conduct. In the absence of pleas expressly addressing a claim for exemplary damages, it would be entirely inappropriate for the Tribunal to award them.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3092

    Keywords:

    exemplary damages; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4674


    136th Session, 2023
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her for misconduct.

    Consideration 24

    Extract:

    The complainant is entitled to moral damages. There is medical evidence about her emotional state at the time of her dismissal. She was suffering from stress, anxiety and depression. There is little room to doubt that termination in the circumstances evidenced in this case would have been stressful and even traumatic.

    Keywords:

    moral damages; termination of employment;



  • Judgment 4644


    135th Session, 2023
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant has pursued a number of grievances with the EPO about financial matters and seeks an award of moral damages in relation to either the events underpinning his internal appeals or the conduct of the appeals themselves.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; moral damages;

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    Much of the argument of the complainant in his pleas appears to proceed on the premise that if there was a legal error attending a decision, or delay in the making of a decision, or delay in the finalisation of an appeal, then, without more, an entitlement to moral damages arises. This premise is incorrect. Moral damages are awarded for moral injury and the complainant bears the burden of proving that injury and the causal link with the unlawful conduct of the defendant organisation (see, for example, Judgments 4157, consideration 7, 4156, consideration 5, 3778, consideration 4, and 2471, consideration 5). Delay, of itself, does not entitle a complainant to moral damages (see, for example, Judgments 4487, consideration 14, 4396, consideration 12, 4231, consideration 15, and 4147, consideration 13). Without attempting to describe, exhaustively, what might constitute a moral injury, it includes emotional distress, anxiety, stress, anguish and hardship (see, for example, Judgments 4519, consideration 14, 4156, consideration 6, and 3138, considerations 8 and 14).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2471, 3138, 3778, 4147, 4156, 4157, 4231, 4396, 4487, 4519

    Keywords:

    moral damages;



  • Judgment 4642


    135th Session, 2023
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contends that the EPO failed to keep records of his administrative status.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    Much of the argument of the complainant in his pleas concerning moral damages appears to proceed on the premise that if there was a legal error attending a decision, or delay in the making of a decision, or delay in the finalisation of an appeal or proceedings in the Tribunal, then, without more, an entitlement to moral damages arises. As noted in another judgment adopted at this session (Judgment 4644, consideration 7), this premise is incorrect. Moral damages are awarded for moral injury and the complainant bears the burden of proving that injury and the causal link with the unlawful conduct of the defendant organisation (see, for example, Judgments 4157, consideration 7, 4156, consideration 5, 3778, consideration 4, and 2471, consideration 5). Delay, of itself, does not entitle a complainant to moral damages (see, for example, Judgments 4487, consideration 14, 4396, consideration 12, 4231, consideration 15, and 4147, consideration 13). Without attempting to describe, exhaustively, what might constitute moral injury, it includes emotional distress, anxiety, stress, anguish and hardship (see, for example, Judgments 4519, consideration 14, 4156, consideration 6, and 3138, considerations 8 and 14). There is no persuasive evidence of moral injury to the complainant in respect of any of the events for which he seeks moral damages caused by the conduct of the EPO, even if unlawful. Accordingly, his complaint should, insofar as the complainant seeks moral damages, be dismissed.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2471, 3138, 3778, 4147, 4156, 4157, 4231, 4396, 4487, 4519, 4644

    Keywords:

    delay in internal procedure; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 4631


    135th Session, 2023
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to treat his participation in a strike as an unauthorised absence and the decision to issue him a reprimand for subsequent unauthorised absences on days when he was likewise participating in strikes.

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    Much of the argument of the complainant in his pleas appears to proceed on the premise that if there was a legal error attending a decision, or delay in the making of a decision, or delay in the finalisation of an appeal or proceedings in the Tribunal, then, without more, an entitlement to moral damages arises. As noted in another judgment given this session (Judgment 4644, under 7), this premise is incorrect. Moral damages are awarded for moral injury and the complainant bears the burden of proving that injury and the causal link with the unlawful conduct of the defendant organisation (see, for example, Judgments 4157, consideration 7, 4156, consideration 5, 3778, consideration 4, and 2471, consideration 5). Delay, of itself, does not entitle a complainant to moral damages (see, for example, Judgments 4487, consideration 14, 4396, consideration 12, 4231, consideration 15, and 4147, consideration 13). Without attempting to describe, exhaustively, what might constitute moral injury, it includes emotional distress, anxiety, stress, anguish and hardship (see, for example, Judgments 4519, consideration 14, 4156, consideration 6, and 3138, considerations 8 and 14). There is no persuasive evidence of moral injury to the complainant (beyond the moral injury for a threat of the same character as compensated in Judgment 4433 and for which compensation has already been paid to the complainant) in respect of any of the events for which he seeks moral damages caused by the conduct of the EPO, even if unlawful. Specifically, the complainant’s claim for moral damages because of the apparently hypocritical nature (as he alleges) of the EPO’s additional submissions in these proceedings is plainly untenable. Accordingly, his complaints should, insofar as the complainant seeks moral damages, be dismissed.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2471, 3138, 3778, 4147, 4156, 4157, 4231, 4396, 4433, 4487, 4519, 4644

    Keywords:

    delay; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 4626


    135th Session, 2023
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the rules introduced with effect from 1 July 2013 governing the exercise of the right to strike at the European Patent Office.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    [The complainant] seeks moral damages on behalf of all other staff. There is no legal basis for doing so, particularly having regard to the terms of Article VIII of the Tribunal’s Statute.

    Keywords:

    moral damages; staff representative;

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    Much of the argument of the complainant in his pleas concerning moral damages appears to proceed on the premise that if there was a legal error attending a decision, or delay in the making of a decision, or delay in the finalisation of an appeal or proceedings in the Tribunal, then, without more, an entitlement to moral damages arises. As noted in another judgment given this session (Judgment 4644, under 7), this premise is incorrect. Moral damages are awarded for moral injury and the complainant bears the burden of proving that injury and the causal link with the unlawful conduct of the defendant organisation (see, for example, Judgments 4157, consideration 7, 4156, consideration 5, 3778, consideration 4, and 2471, consideration 5). Delay, of itself, does not entitle a complainant to moral damages (see, for example, Judgments 4487, consideration 14, 4396, consideration 12, 4231, consideration 15, and 4147, consideration 13). Without attempting to describe, exhaustively, what might constitute moral injury, it includes emotional distress, anxiety, stress, anguish and hardship (see, for example, Judgments 4519, consideration 14, 4156, consideration 6, and 3138, considerations 8 and 14). There is no persuasive evidence of moral injury to the complainant (beyond the moral injury for the injurious impact of Circular No. 347 on his right to strike of the same character as compensated in Judgment 4430 and for which compensation has already been paid to the complainant) in respect of any of the events for which he seeks moral damages caused by the conduct of the EPO, even if unlawful. Accordingly, his complaint should, insofar as the complainant seeks moral damages for himself, be dismissed.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3138, 3778, 4147, 4156, 4157, 4231, 4396, 4487, 4519, 4644

    Keywords:

    delay; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 4615


    135th Session, 2023
    Energy Charter Conference
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment.

    Consideration 27

    Extract:

    The Tribunal finds that the unlawful imposition of the termination measure deprived the complainant of the requirements of due process that would have been open to her in adversarial proceedings, had a disciplinary measure been imposed (see Judgments 3848, consideration 9, and 2861, consideration 105).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2861, 3848

    Keywords:

    moral damages;



  • Judgment 4614


    135th Session, 2023
    Energy Charter Conference
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to reject her harassment claim.

    Consideration 17

    Extract:

    [T]he impugned decision should be set aside. Given the effluxion of time and the fact that the complainant no longer works for the organisation and would no longer need protection from any harassment (see, for example, Judgment 4286, consideration 19), it is not appropriate to remit the matter to the organisation to reconsider the complainant’s harassment grievance. In any event, she does not seek such an order. As the moral injury is evident from the circumstances of the case, the complainant is entitled to moral damages (see Judgment 4541, consideration 11).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4286, 4541

    Keywords:

    compensation; harassment; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4606


    135th Session, 2023
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the non-recognition of her illness as an occupational illness and requests that her sick leave entitlements be re-credited to her.

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    To be entitled to moral damages, as consistently stated by the case law, the complainant bears the burden of proof and must provide evidence of the injury suffered, the alleged unlawful act and the causal link between the unlawful act and the injury (see, for example, Judgments 4158, under 4, 4157, under 7, and 4156, under 5).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4156, 4157, 4158

    Keywords:

    moral damages;



  • Judgment 4603


    135th Session, 2023
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term appointment on account of his unsatisfactory performance.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    Inasmuch as the complainant has not articulated, with any degree of particularity, the specific effects which the unlawful decision has had upon him, divorced from his personal circumstances more generally, the Tribunal will not award him the moral damages that he claims.

    Keywords:

    moral damages;



  • Judgment 4602


    135th Session, 2023
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to award her material and moral damages as a victim of harassment and abuse of authority by her direct supervisor.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; harassment; moral damages;



  • Judgment 4592


    135th Session, 2023
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the calculation of the amounts transferred into the Eurocontrol scheme in respect of his previously-acquired pension rights and seeks compensation for the injury he considers he has suffered as a result of alleged negligence on the part of the Organisation.

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    Whatever the outcome of the present dispute, the effect of the failure to examine the complainant’s internal complaints was to delay its final settlement. That failure has in itself caused the complainant moral injury which will be fairly redressed by ordering Eurocontrol to pay him compensation of 10,000 euros.

    Keywords:

    moral damages; moral injury;

1, 2, 3 | next >


 
Last updated: 07.03.2024 ^ top