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

Organisation (71, 73, 74, 673,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Organisation
Total judgments found: 212

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



  • Judgment 2788


    106th Session, 2009
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "[The] purpose [of probation] is to provide an organisation with an opportunity to assess an individual's suitability for a position. In the course of making this assessment, an organisation must establish clear objectives against which performance will be assessed, provide the necessary guidance for the performance of the duties, identify in a timely fashion the unsatisfactory aspects of the performance so that remedial steps may be taken, and give a specific warning that the continued employment is in jeopardy (see Judgment 2529, under 15)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2529

    Keywords:

    candidate; confirmation of appointment; criteria; definition; fitness for international civil service; organisation; organisation's duties; post; probation; purpose; qualifications; refusal; unsatisfactory service; warning; work appraisal;



  • 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 2751


    105th Session, 2008
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "The intention with which a statement is made is not necessarily determinative of the question whether a statement that is wholly irrelevant is also one that can serve no proper purpose." The complainant represented three colleagues whose complaints were considered by the Tribunal in Judgment 2514. In its replies the Organisation had stated that, by reason of the time he had spent providing legal assistance to staff members, the complainant's work as an examiner had been less satisfactory than it should have been. "That was defamatory. It was also inconsistent with the duty of the EPO to respect the complainant's dignity. In the context of the other comments that were within the limits of the privilege that attaches to proceedings before the Tribunal, it carried the threat of possible administrative consequences for the complainant's employment. Such a remark can serve no proper purpose. Accordingly, it was not privileged and the complainant is entitled to seek relief with respect to it."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2514

    Keywords:

    breach; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; counsel; iloat; insurance benefit; intention of parties; organisation; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; procedure; purpose; request by a party; respect for dignity; right; security of tenure; staff representative;

    Considerations 3 and 6

    Extract:

    "Statements made in legal proceedings are privileged, whether those statements are made in writing in the pleadings or orally in the course of a hearing. The consequence is that, even if defamatory, they cannot be the subject of legal proceedings or sanction. The privilege, sometimes referred to as 'in court privilege', exists, not for the benefit of the parties or their representatives, but because it is necessary for the proper determination of proceedings and the issues that arise in their course. In Judgment 1391 the Tribunal recognised that the privilege attaches to its proceedings, as well as those of internal appeal bodies. [...]
    [T]he Tribunal's consideration of the extent of the privilege that attaches to statements made in the course of internal appeal proceedings or proceedings before the Tribunal has concentrated on statements made by staff members. However, the privilege is the same in the case of statements made by or on behalf of defendant organisations, and they must be allowed a similar degree of freedom in what they say and the manner of its expression. Even so, a statement will constitute a perversion of a defendant organisation's right of reply if it is wholly irrelevant and it can only serve an improper purpose."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1391

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; confidential evidence; consequence; disciplinary measure; formal requirements; freedom of speech; iloat; internal appeals body; international civil servant; judicial review; misuse of authority; oral proceedings; organisation; privileges and immunities; procedure; purpose; reply; respect for dignity; right; same; settlement out of court;

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "[A] claim may be made and pursued against an organisation if its conduct in proceedings before an internal appeals body or this Tribunal constitutes an abuse of process or a perversion of the right of reply."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; conduct; iloat; internal appeals body; misuse of authority; organisation; procedural flaw; procedure; reply; right;



  • Judgment 2745


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

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "'Constructive dismissal' is a phrase used to signify that an organisation has breached the terms of a staff member's contract in such a way as to indicate that it will no longer be bound by that contract."

    Keywords:

    breach; condition; contract; definition; implied decision; international civil servant; organisation; termination;



  • Judgment 2742


    105th Session, 2008
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 34

    Extract:

    "It was said in Judgment 2510 that 'an international organisation necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts and the redeployment of staff'. The word 'necessarily' in that statement indicates that that power will be implied even if it is not expressly conferred by the relevant regulations. However, that power cannot be implied if it is contrary to the regulations."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2510

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; creation of post; discretion; interpretation; organisation; reorganisation; written rule;



  • Judgment 2712


    104th Session, 2008
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The Organization appointed a candidate who did not meet one of the conditions stipulated in the vacancy announcement. "[T]he fact that the appointment of the successful candidate, who happens to be Lebanese, conveniently enabled WIPO to achieve some of its management goals, such as that of increasing the proportion of women in senior management positions or that of the geographical distribution of its officials [...] is [...] irrelevant in this case. However legitimate these goals may be, they could not override the Organization's obligation to appoint to the post in question a candidate who possessed the required qualifications and experience initially stipulated. Geographical origin could be taken into consideration only if the opposing candidates were of equal merit."

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; criteria; geographical distribution; increase; nationality; organisation; organisation's duties; place of origin; post; professional experience; purpose; qualifications; same; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2706


    104th Session, 2008
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant, who was sexually harassed by her supervisor, wants the Tribunal to order that she be promoted. "[T]he Organization is of course right in saying that the compensation for her injuries should not take the form of being granted a higher grade. The advancement of an official naturally obeys its own logic related to the classification of the job done and the professional merit of the person in question, which has nothing to do with the logic behind compensation for injuries which may have been caused to this person by the international organisation employing him or her."

    Keywords:

    allowance; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; difference; harassment; injury; organisation; organisation's duties; post classification; promotion; qualifications; request by a party; respect for dignity; sex discrimination; supervisor;



  • Judgment 2694


    104th Session, 2008
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recalls that "career prospects within an international organisation are not something that exists independently of all the rights and duties of its staff, that if the non-renewal of a contract is lawful, so is the career hiatus and that when a contract is concluded for a fixed term, the staff member's career ends lawfully on expiry of this period (see Judgment 1610, under 24)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1610

    Keywords:

    career; contract; fixed-term; international civil servant; non-renewal of contract; organisation; period; right; separation from service;



  • Judgment 2662


    103rd Session, 2007
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant contends that there was a violation of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. "Reliance on the Convention is misplaced as it is not applicable to international organisations. The complainant's rights are those derived from the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules and from the general principles of law applicable to such organisations."

    Keywords:

    breach; complainant; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; enforcement; general principle; international civil service principles; international instrument; organisation; provision; right; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2657


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant contests the decision not to appoint him to a post as examiner at the European Patent Office on the grounds that he did not meet the physical requirements for the post but the Tribunal considers that persons who have applied for a post in an international organisation and who have not been recruited are barred from access to the Tribunal. The complainant asks that the Organisation be ordered to waive its immunity to enable him to bring proceedings before a German court. "[T]he Tribunal [recalls that it] has no authority to order the EPO to waive its immunity (see Judgment 933, under 6). It notes, however, that the present judgment creates a legal vacuum and considers it highly desirable that the Organisation should seek a solution affording the complainant access to a court, either by waiving its immunity or by submitting the dispute to arbitration."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 933

    Keywords:

    appointment; arbitration; candidate; claim; competence of tribunal; condition; grounds; handicapped person; judgment of the tribunal; medical examination; medical fitness; municipal court; open competition; organisation; post; refusal; safeguard; waiver of immunity;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant contests the decision not to appoint him to a post as examiner at the European Patent Office on the grounds that he did not meet the physical requirements for the post. The Organisation submits that the Tribunal is not competent to hear complaints from external applicants for a post in an organisation that has recognised its jurisdiction. "However regrettable a decision declining jurisdiction may be, in that the complainant is liable to feel that he is the victim of a denial of justice, the Tribunal has no option but to confirm the well-established case law according to which it is a court of limited jurisdiction and 'bound to apply the mandatory provisions governing its competence', as stated in Judgment 67, delivered on 26 October 1962. [...]
    It [can be inferred from Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal] that persons who are applicants for a post in an international organisation but who have not been recruited are barred from access to the Tribunal. It is only in a case where, even in the absence of a contract signed by the parties, the commitments made by the two sides are equivalent to a contract that the Tribunal can decide to retain jurisdiction (see for example Judgment 339). According to Judgment 621, there must be 'an unquestioned and unqualified concordance of will on all terms of the relationship'. That is not the case, however, in the present circumstances: while proposals regarding an appointment were unquestionably made to the complainant, the defendant was not bound by them until it had established that the conditions governing appointments laid down in the regulations were met."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 67, 339, 621

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; case law; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; consequence; contract; declaration of recognition; definition; exception; formal requirements; grounds; handicapped person; iloat statute; intention of parties; interpretation; medical examination; medical fitness; open competition; organisation; post; proposal; provision; refusal; terms of appointment; vested competence; written rule;



  • Judgment 2646


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal recalls that the reason for probation is to enable an organisation to assess the probationer's suitability for a position. For this reason, it has recognised that a high degree of deference ought to be accorded to an organisation's exercise of its discretion regarding decisions concerning probationary matters including the confirmation of appointment, the extensions of a probationary term, and the identification of its own interests and requirements."

    Keywords:

    confirmation of appointment; decision; definition; discretion; extension; judicial review; limits; organisation; organisation's interest; post; probation; purpose; qualifications;

    Considerations 13 and 14

    Extract:

    The complainant was dismissed at the end of his probationary period. He states that despite his repeated requests he was never transferred to another directorate. "As to the case law, the complainant relies on Judgment 396 in support of [this] assertion [...]. The issue in that case was whether the head of the Organisation had correctly applied a particular provision of the Staff Regulations authorising him to terminate the appointment of a probationer at any time in the Organisation's interests. The Tribunal stated that '[a]s a rule, before a [probationer] is dismissed thought should be given to transferring him to some other post on trial, especially if he is junior in rank'. It must, however, be noted that this was said in the context of a misunderstanding between the probationer and his supervisor and the Tribunal's observation that such a misunderstanding does not necessarily justify instant dismissal. In the present case, the stated reason for the dismissal was poor performance.
    To conclude that in situations of poor performance a staff member on probation will always be entitled to a transfer prior to being dismissed undermines the whole purpose of probationary terms. In some circumstances a transfer may be the proper option, but the circumstances of the present case do not warrant this finding."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 396

    Keywords:

    case law; discretion; enforcement; executive head; general principle; grounds; organisation; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; probation; provision; purpose; refusal; request by a party; right; staff regulations and rules; supervisor; termination; transfer; unsatisfactory service; working relations;



  • Judgment 2645


    103rd Session, 2007
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "[T]he decision not to renew the complainant's appointment was taken for a reason other than that invoked by the defendant and should therefore be quashed".

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; contract; decision; decision quashed; difference; grounds; non-renewal of contract; organisation;



  • Judgment 2636


    103rd Session, 2007
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    "By Article VIII of its Statute the Tribunal is empowered to rescind impugned decisions, to order the performance of obligations and to award compensation. It is not empowered to order apologies. Nor is it empowered to require undertakings as to performance of obligations in the future, as claimed by the complainant."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article VIII of the Statute of the Tribunal

    Keywords:

    allowance; apology; claim; competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; iloat statute; organisation; organisation's duties; payment;



  • Judgment 2635


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

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "While the head of an organisation must take into account the organisation's interests and the staff member's abilities and interests in the exercise of the discretion to transfer a staff member, in cases where the two are at odds, greater weight may be accorded by the decision-maker to the interests of the organisation (see Judgment 883)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 883

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; difference; discretion; executive head; organisation; organisation's interest; qualifications; staff member's interest; transfer;



  • Judgment 2626


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5(a)

    Extract:

    "A decision to refuse to publish in an international organisation's in-house magazine the corrigendum of an article which, in the opinion of the staff member concerned, injures his personal interests may constitute a breach of that staff member's personal rights and an infringement of his freedom of expression. Insofar as such a decision in itself produces legal effects and infringes the rights of the staff member concerned, it constitutes an administrative act causing injury."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; breach; cause of action; effect; freedom of speech; individual decision; injury; moral injury; organisation; publication; refusal; respect for dignity; right; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 2623


    103rd Session, 2007
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal has no authority to issue interim injunctions against organisations that have accepted its jurisdiction."

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; declaration of recognition; iloat statute; judicial review; organisation; vested competence;



  • Judgment 2585


    102nd Session, 2007
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "While it is true, as the Tribunal recalled in Judgment 2156, that 'elected representatives of the staff enjoy specific rights and safeguards in accordance with the general principles which govern employment relationships in international organisations and which are also generally recognised in national labour legislation', it is still up to the staff member complaining that such specific rights and safeguards have been violated to prove that fact and not merely rely on bald assertions."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2156

    Keywords:

    breach; burden of proof; case law; collective rights; domestic law; general principle; iloat; international civil servant; organisation; request by a party; right; safeguard; staff representative; working relations;



  • Judgment 2581


    102nd Session, 2007
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "[C]onsistent precedent has it that 'decisions in respect of post classification are at the Administration's discretion and can only be set aside on limited grounds. It does not behove the Tribunal to substitute its own post assessment for that of the Organization' (see for example Judgment 1874)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1874

    Keywords:

    case law; decision; discretion; grounds; iloat; judicial review; limits; organisation; post classification;



  • 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 CERNís 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 2562


    101st Session, 2006
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal's case law has determined that the head of an international organisation has the 'executive authority to assign staff to different posts' (Judgment 534), and 'is empowered to change the duties assigned to his subordinates' (Judgment 265)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 265, 534

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; assignment; case law; discretion; executive head; iloat; international civil servant; organisation; post; supervisor;

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


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top