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

Material damages (693,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Material damages
Total judgments found: 145

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



  • Judgment 3588


    121st Session, 2016
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the amount of damages awarded by WHO following his internal appeal against the decision not to match him to a new position after the abolition of his post and to terminate his appointment.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "[T]he HBAís recommendation that the complainant be awarded his P5 salary, including all benefits, entitlements and compensation for home leave as of [...] until the expiration of his P5 fixed-term contract [...] was an appropriate approach to the material damages which should have been awarded to the complainant. From that amount should be deducted any monies earned from other employment during that period. The complainant says there was none. However this assessment of the material damages would not include the WHO component of the health insurance contribution payable over that period nor the amounts which otherwise would have been payable by way of pension contributions (see, for example, Judgment 3153, under 4-6)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3153

    Keywords:

    material damages; material injury;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "[B]ecause the complainant was not appointed to the new P4 position, he lost the valuable benefit of furthering his career in WHO for which he is entitled to material damages."

    Keywords:

    material damages; material injury;



  • Judgment 3436


    119th Session, 2015
    Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: Following the abolition of her post in the context of the CTA restructuring, the complainant successfully impugns the decision to terminate her appointment.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    [I]f the CTA considers, in view of its staff complement and budgetary resources, that it cannot actually reinstate the complainant, it shall have to pay her material damages for her unlawful removal from her post. [...] The CTA will [...] be ordered to pay the complainant the equivalent of the salary and allowances of all kinds which she would have received had her contract remained in force for a period of five years [...], less the compensation she received on termination of her contract and any remuneration she may have received during this period. The Centre must also pay the complainant the equivalent of the contributions to pension, provident or social security schemes which it would have had to bear during the same period.

    Keywords:

    material damages; material injury; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 3409


    119th Session, 2015
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal awarded the complainants material and moral damages stemming from IFAD's unlawful decisions and violation of its duty of care.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "As the complainants lost a valuable opportunity to have their contracts renewed in positions other than the abolished positions, the Tribunal awards them material damages in the amount they would have earned at their respective grades for one year [...] including all allowances, benefits and entitlements, less any amounts already received by way of salary and emoluments from any other employment for that period, plus monthly interest of 5 per cent from the date of separation to the date of final payment. The Tribunal awards them moral damages stemming from the unlawful decisions and IFADís violation of its duty of care and failure to respect their dignity [...]. The Tribunal does not see any justification for an award of exemplary damages so that claim is dismissed."

    Keywords:

    material damages; material injury; moral damages; moral injury;



  • Judgment 3332


    118th Session, 2014
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution following the Administrationís decision that the award of a disability pension compensated her for the Tribunalís award of material damages.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The delay in paying the material damages was due to the IAEA seeking clarification regarding the complainantís unique situation and that delay cannot be considered unreasonable or excessive under the circumstances."

    Keywords:

    application for execution; delay; material damages;



  • Judgment 3329


    117th Session, 2014
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to renew his contract after he refused to be reassigned, and obtains its quashing on the ground that this decision was tantamount to a hidden disciplinary measure.

    Considerations 13-14

    Extract:

    Given the specific circumstances of this case, the Tribunal will not [...] order the complainantís reinstatement in the Organization. Indeed, reinstatement would be inappropriate, as the complainant himself acknowledges in his written submissions, when he states that it would be ďimpossible for [him] to be reinstated now that so much time has elapsedĒ. There is however reason to grant the complainant compensation for the damages ensuing from the unlawful nature of the impugned decision.

    Keywords:

    material damages; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 3290


    116th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: Following the abolition of the complainant's post for lack of financial resources, the reassignment process was organized but was ultimately unsuccessful in finding the complainant another post.

    Consideration 35

    Extract:

    [A]s the Director-Generalís decision [...] confirming the termination of the complainantís appointment was based on relevant evidence not disclosed to the complainant as was the Regional Directorís earlier decision [...], they must be set aside, the latter to the extent that it relates to the complainantís separation from service. In view of the passage of time, reinstatement is not a viable option. However, the complainant is entitled to an award of damages [...].

    Keywords:

    material damages; reinstatement; separation from service;



  • Judgment 3282


    116th Session, 2014
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision not to renew his contract based on an "overall assessment" that his performance was below the acceptable level.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    Considering reinstatement could raise substantial practical difficulties because of the time that has elapsed since the complainantís separation from service, the complainant is ďentitled to full compensation for the material and moral injury he sustainedĒ (see Judgment 1386, under 26).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1386

    Keywords:

    material damages; moral damages; reinstatement; separation from service;



  • Judgment 3238


    115th Session, 2013
    Centre for the Development of Enterprise
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to terminate their appointments due to the abolition of their posts following a restructuring.

    Considerations 19-20

    Extract:

    In view of the nature and length of the complainantsí appointments, the Tribunal will order the CDE to reinstate them in the Centre, to the full extent possible, as from the date on which their dismissal took effect, [...] with all the legal consequences that this entails.
    However, if the CDE considers, in view of its staff complement and budgetary resources, that it cannot actually reinstate the complainants, it shall have to pay them material damages for their unlawful removal from their posts. In this connection, the complainants have no grounds for claiming the payment of all the emoluments which they would have received until they reached retirement age because, although their contracts were concluded for an indefinite period of time, they did not guarantee them an appointment with the Centre until the end of their careers, having regard to the latterís very difficult financial situation.

    Keywords:

    material damages; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 3215


    115th Session, 2013
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: As the complainant did not exhaust internal remedies concerning her claim of harassment and failed to prove negligence on the part of IAEA, the Tribunal dismissed her complaint.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "As discussed in Judgment 2804, negligence is the failure to take reasonable steps to prevent a foreseeable risk of injury. Liability in negligence is occasioned when the failure to take such steps causes an injury that was foreseeable. A person seeking damages for negligence bears the burden of establishing the factual foundation on which the claim is based."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2804

    Keywords:

    accident; burden of proof; evidence; general principle; injury; liability; material damages; negligence; organisation's duties; service-incurred; working conditions;



  • Judgment 3198


    115th Session, 2013
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant seeks the withdrawal from his personal file of the warnings concerning his productivity.

    Consideration 25

    Extract:

    "According to the case law of the Tribunal, no damages will be ordered where a decision does not hamper a career and the matter which was complained of has been withdrawn (see Judgment 1380, under 11)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1380

    Keywords:

    decision; evidence; lack of evidence; lack of injury; material damages; moral damages; no cause of action; professional injury; withdrawal of decision;



  • Judgment 3166


    114th Session, 2013
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant alleges that he suffered harassment, mobbing and defamation on the part of his supervisors.

    Considerations 18 and 19

    Extract:

    "[T]he JAC made a finding of procedural irregularities in relation to the consideration of the complainantís grievances. It recognised, as this Tribunal has stated, that an organisation has a duty to its staff members to investigate claims of harassment (see Judgment 3071). This conclusion would have warranted consideration of a remedy. However, the JAC adopted the approach, accepted by the Secretary General, that the Federation had ďacted in the [complainantís] favourĒ because the contract of [the alleged harasser], amongst others, had not been renewed.
    The non-renewal of [that person]ís contract did not involve a vindication of the complainantís rights. Ordinarily, the mechanism for addressing the violation of a personís rights is to award compensation to the aggrieved person or to make an order restoring the person to the position he or she would have been in but for the violation. The nonrenewal of the contract of a person who had violated a complainantís rights may, of course, provide moral comfort to the complainant. However, the task of the Secretary General is to determine a response in relation to a grievance formally raised and established which remedies the effect of the proven violation of rights. The non-renewal of a contract, such as occurred in the present case, does not serve this purpose."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3071

    Keywords:

    advisory body; claim; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; decision; executive head; harassment; injury; material damages; moral damages; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; procedural flaw;



  • Judgment 3154


    114th Session, 2013
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The ITU applies for interpretation of paragraph 2 of the decision in Judgment 2958 concerning the definition of "gross salary" for the calculation of termination indemnity.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The ordinary meaning of 'gross salary' is the full amount of a staff memberís regular remuneration including allowances, overtime pay, commissions and bonuses, and any other amount usually paid, before any deductions are made. In context, the notion of 'gross salary' was chosen to indicate the base salary prior to the staff deduction, plus all allowances and benefits. This interpretation is consistent with the fact that the award of damages had to be the equivalent of reinstatement and that the express purpose was to compensate the complainant for the time he 'should have worked with the Union'."

    Keywords:

    amount; application for interpretation; compensation; gross salary; interpretation; judgment of the tribunal; material damages;



  • Judgment 3137


    113th Session, 2012
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    [T]he time that has now elapsed makes it impractical to order the complainantís reinstatement. However, he is entitled to material damages that take account of what would have happened had he not been dismissed. In this regard, the complainant contends that his contract was extended for a further period of two years on 31 July 2007. Although there was a recommendation to that effect, the evidence indicates, as claimed by WHO, that it was only renewed until 9 November 2007. Had the matter been properly considered at that time, it may well have resulted in a finding of negligence, but not of misconduct. In these circumstances, it is likely that his contract would only have been extended until 31 July 2008 but with a prospect of further extension if his performance proved satisfactory in that period. Given that his previous performance had been rated highly, there was a good chance that it would be satisfactory and his contract then renewed. That being so, the complainant lost not only the salary and benefits he would have received until 31 July 2008, but also a valuable chance that his contract would then have been further extended. In the circumstances he is entitled to material damages equivalent to one yearís salary and other benefits from 10 November 2007 to 9 November 2008 had his contract not been terminated.

    Keywords:

    material damages; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 3130


    113th Session, 2012
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "The complainant requests an award of 10,000 United States dollars for unreasonable delays in the internal appeal proceedings. The appeal before the Regional Board of Appeal lasted only nine months from the date of appeal [...] to the date of the decision by the Regional Director [...] to endorse the Boardís recommendation [...]. The complainantís appeal before the [Headquarters Board of Appeal] lasted just over 13 months from the date of appeal [...] to the decision by the Director-General [...]. Considering that the two appeals took less than two years to complete, the complainant cannot be considered to have suffered from inordinate delays meriting an award of damages. This is especially true considering that the two tiered appeal process has provided him with greater protection of his rights as a staff member."

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; claim; compensation; complaint allowed in part; date; decision; executive head; internal appeal; international civil servant; material damages; reasonable time; recommendation; refusal; right;



  • Judgment 2935


    109th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The complainant claims punitive damages. This claim may be summarily dismissed because it is tantamount to asking the Tribunal to make an example of the Organisation by obliging it to pay compensation exceeding the material and moral injury actually suffered by the complainant. Such a claim may be allowed only in exceptional circumstances, for instance where an organisation's conduct has been in gross breach of its obligation to act in good faith."

    Keywords:

    breach; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; good faith; material damages;



  • Judgment 2891


    108th Session, 2010
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal finds that UNIDO failed to deal with the complainant's appeal in a timely and diligent manner. According to well-established case law, the Organization has a duty to maintain a fully functional internal appeals body. Further, "[s]ince compliance with internal appeal procedures is a condition precedent to access to the Tribunal, an organisation has a positive obligation to see to it that such procedures move forward with reasonable speed" (see Judgment 2197, under 33). The complainant's appeal was filed on 10 September 2004 and the Director-General's decision to endorse the appeal in part was dated 11 March 2008. This represents a significant and unacceptable delay of approximately 42 months. This delay entitles the complainant to moral damages. However, having regard to the reason for the delay (mainly obstacles in the appeal procedure) and considering the Organization's subsequent steps to rectify the situation, the Tribunal does not consider that the delay warrants an award of exemplary damages."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2197

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; internal appeal; internal appeals body; material damages;



  • Judgment 2878


    108th Session, 2010
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal finds that the Organization failed to deal with the complainant's appeal in a timely and diligent manner as the internal appeal process lasted for approximately 21 months, which is unacceptable in view of the simplicity of the appeal which hinged primarily on a question of receivability (see Judgment 2841, under 9). Therefore the Tribunal awards the complainant 1,500 euros in damages."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2841

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; delay; internal appeal; material damages; organisation's duties; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;



  • Judgment 2867


    108th Session, 2010
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    "Although the Joint Appeals Board recommended that the complainant be reinstated in a post in the Global Mechanism, there is no evidence that her contract would have been renewed for the 2008- 2009 biennium. Accordingly, reinstatement will not be ordered. However, as the abolition of her post was the only reason advanced for the non-renewal of the complainant's contract and there is nothing to suggest that her contract would not otherwise have been extended for two years, she is entitled to material damages in the amount of salary and other benefits she would have received had her contract been renewed for a further two years, together with interest [...]."

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; extension; legitimate expectation; material damages; non-renewal of contract; reinstatement; staff reduction;



  • Judgment 2843


    107th Session, 2009
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 4 and 6

    Extract:

    As a result of slipping on liquid in the Office's underground car park, the complainant suffered a fracture of the leg.
    "The complainant contends [...] that the Office breached the duty of care owed to its employees by failing to provide a safe work environment. He maintains that the Office was negligent in its cleaning and maintenance of the car park and claims that it should have been mopped instead of just swept on a weekly basis and that the security staff were not specifically trained to check for and report oil or water stains."
    "Given the nature of the premises, namely a car park, it cannot be concluded that it was reasonable for the Office to take measures in addition to those that were in place at the time of the accident. In particular, it cannot be concluded that it should have arranged for the mopping rather than the sweeping of the floors. Moreover, it has not been established that, even if additional measures had been taken, they would have eliminated the risk of injury. Accordingly, negligence has not been established and the complaint must be dismissed."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 435, 2533, 2804

    Keywords:

    accident; general principle; invalidity; liability; material damages; organisation's duties; service-incurred;



  • Judgment 2841


    107th Session, 2009
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 7 and 9

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal is of the opinion that the complaint is irreceivable."
    "However, the Tribunal finds that the Organization failed to deal with the complainant's appeal in a timely and diligent manner. According to well established case law, '[s]ince compliance with internal appeal procedures is a condition precedent to access to the Tribunal, an organisation has a positive obligation to see to it that such procedures move forward with reasonable speed' (see Judgment 2197, under 33). In the present case, the internal appeal process lasted for approximately 18 months which is unacceptable in view of the simplicity of the appeal which hinged primarily on a question of receivability. The Tribunal therefore awards the complainant 1,500 euros in damages."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2197

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; delay; internal appeal; material damages; moral damages; organisation's duties; time limit;

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


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top