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 2300


    96th Session, 2004
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "The complainant contends that the [challenged] decision is unlawful because it is based on an opinion by the Joint Appeals Committee signed by its Chairman alone, whereas it is common practice in Interpol, as in other international organisations, for this type of document to be signed by all members of the Committee. The Organization rightly points out that, in accordance with Article 152(3) of the Staff Rules, the Chairman of the relevant Joint Committee shall sign the consultative opinion. This provision cannot be challenged on the grounds that different practices prevail in other organisations."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 152(3) of Interpol's Staff Rules

    Keywords:

    advisory body; advisory opinion; decision; difference; flaw; formal flaw; internal appeals body; organisation; practice; provision; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2296


    96th Session, 2004
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "[T]he right of an international civil servant to recover from his employer the taxes which he has been forced to pay on his tax-exempt income cannot be made contingent upon the employer's right to recover those amounts from the national government concerned."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; condition; international civil servant; member state; organisation; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; right; tax;



  • Judgment 2232


    95th Session, 2003
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director- General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the complainant was not a staff member. "The defendant [...] considers that since the particular case of the Director-General of the Organisation was not expressly provided for in the texts on which the Tribunal's jurisdiction is based, an express provision recognising its jurisdiction would have been necessary. It points out that [another international organisation] (UNESCO), having realised that it had no statutory provision nor any contractual stipulation attributing jurisdiction in the event of a dispute involving its Director-General, decided in 1999 to include such a clause in the contract it signed with him. whilst the Tribunal does not deny that UNESCO thereby clarified difficulties which were liable to arise, it does not view that as authority for the reverse proposition that contracts containing no such clause, entered into by other organisations with their respective chief administrative officers, must be deemed to exclude the jurisdiction of the Tribunal."

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; contract; decision; exception; executive head; grounds; interpretation; no provision; organisation; provision; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; termination; written rule;

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. "In accordance with the established case law of all international administrative tribunals, the Tribunal reaffirms that the independence of international civil servants is an essential guarantee, not only for the civil servants themselves, but also for the proper functioning of international organisations. In the case of heads of organisations, that independence is protected, inter alia, by the fact that they are appointed for a limited term of office. To concede that the authority in which the power of appointment is vested - in this case the Conference of the States parties of the Organisation - may terminate that appointment in its unfettered discretion, would constitute an unacceptable violation of the principles on which international organisations' activities are founded [...], by rendering officials vulnerable to pressures and to political change. The possibility that a measure of the kind taken against the complainant may, exceptionally, be justified in cases of grave misconduct cannot be excluded, but such a measure, being punitive in nature, could only be taken in full compliance with the principle of due process, following a procedure enabling the individual concerned to defend his or her case effectively before an independent and impartial body."

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; appointment; breach; case law; complaint allowed; condition; discretion; exception; executive body; executive head; fixed-term; general principle; hidden disciplinary measure; iloat; independence; internal appeals body; international civil servant; limits; member state; organisation; right to reply; safeguard; serious misconduct; termination; tribunal;



  • Judgment 2228


    95th Session, 2003
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    The Staff Committee's access to the organisation's internal electronic mail system was withdrawn after the organisation made an objection on technical grounds following the mass distribution of documents. "The Staff Committee is responsible for [...] maintaining "suitable contacts between the competent administrative authorities and the staff", which necessarily implies the availability of adequate means of communication within the organisation... Nevertheless, the incident mentioned by the [organisation] involving the mass distribution of a union report [...] shows that some degree of control is necessary, without jeopardising the Staff Committee's freedom of expression and speech."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; consequence; facilities; freedom of speech; international civil servant; liability; organisation; publication; purpose; rebuttal; refusal; report; staff union;



  • Judgment 2227


    95th Session, 2003
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The Appeals Committee's report on the complainant's case was drafted in german. He expresses the view that in future its reports should be drafted in one of the official languages of the Tribunal, i. e. in either english or french. "The Tribunal recognises the difficulties arising from the translation of documents drafted in german [...] Nevertheless, it must remind the parties, which are aware of the fact, that its rules admit only two working languages - english and french - but that the [organisation] is perfectly entitled, as far as its own purposes are concerned, to use any of its three working languages, including german."

    Keywords:

    iloat; iloat statute; internal appeals body; language of rule; organisation; report; right;

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The complainant was informed by a letter of 22 December 1999 that the administration reserved the right to approve the photocopying and distribution of circulars issued by staff representatives. "The Tribunal recalled, in Judgment 911 [...], that a staff association enjoys broad freedom of speech and the right to take to task the administration of the organisation whose employees it represents, but that like any other freedom such freedom has its bounds. thus any action that impairs the dignity of the international civil service, and likewise gross abuse of freedom of speech, are inadmissible. But the prevention of such abuse cannot give the administration a power of prior censorship over the communication of written information produced by the groups and associations concerned. Herein lies the problem in this case: the Office considers it has a general right to authorise, which it maintains it uses only with moderation, but the limits of such authorisation are by no means clear. The Tribunal cannot set aside a general decision on the grounds that it does not offer the guarantees that are in any case available to staff members on the basis of the general principles of international civil service law, as established and interpreted by the Tribunal and other international administrative tribunals. These principles confine the administration's scope of action to cases where there is gross abuse of the right to freedom of expression or lack of protection of the individual interests of persons affected by remarks that are ill-intentioned, defamatory or which concern their private lives. And it is in the light of these principles that the letter of 22 December 1999 [...] should be interpreted. a refusal to grant an authorisation may be regarded as lawful only if it complies with the above principles."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 911

    Keywords:

    acceptance; case law; collective rights; exception; freedom of speech; general decision; general principle; iloat; international civil servant; international civil service principles; interpretation; judicial review; limits; organisation; outside activity; publication; refusal; respect for dignity; right; safeguard; staff member's interest; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity; tribunal;



  • Judgment 2226


    95th Session, 2003
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 21

    Extract:

    The complainant was reassigned from one day to the next. "Considering the complainant's length of service (12 years with the organization), the absence of any report of misconduct or unsatisfactory performance on his part, or any indication of urgency that might have justified a sudden, unheralded management decision to reassign him, the action of the Director-General was flawed by procedural irregularity."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; executive body; executive head; flaw; lack of evidence; misconduct; notice; organisation; period; procedural flaw; reassignment; report; satisfactory service; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 2223


    95th Session, 2003
    European Molecular Biology Laboratory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The fact that the Director-General [did not initiate] the appeal procedure invalidates the defendant's argument that internal remedies were not exhausted, although they should have been as required by article vii of the Tribunal's Statute. While it is regrettable that the case was never brought before the Joint Advisory Appeals Board, this does not prevent the Tribunal from ruling on the merits of the complaint, which has been filed within the applicable rules."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE TRIBUNAL'S STATUTE

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; executive head; formal requirements; good faith; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure; receivability of the complaint; refusal; staff member's duties;



  • Judgment 2222


    95th Session, 2003
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "Referring to the Tribunal's case law, in particular Judgments 70 and 1543, the defendant submits that the Tribunal's competence, ratione materiae, does not extend to disputes regarding the Director-General's discretion to waive diplomatic immunity. It is worth noting that the complainant does not in fact [...] challenge the decision to waive his diplomatic immunity in itself. He rather challenges the circumstances in which that decision was taken, which in his view violated his contractual rights or those arising from the general principles of law which should be observed by international organisations. Since the case law referred to by the defendant does not apply, the Tribunal is of the view that only a consideration of the merits of the case may show whether the complainant's allegations are well founded."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 70, 1543

    Keywords:

    breach; case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; decision; discretion; executive head; general principle; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; judicial review; organisation; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; right; terms of appointment; waiver of immunity;



  • Judgment 2221


    95th Session, 2003
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9 and 10

    Extract:

    "It is well settled that a promotion decision is a discretionary decision which can only be challenged on limited grounds. Moreover, it is settled that mere satisfaction of necessary criteria does not ordinarily confer a right to promotion. [...] It follows that the [competent authorities] were entitled to have regard, in determining whether to backdate the complainant's promotion, to all matters pertaining to his work performance, [including] his staff reports, even though the [applicable] guidelines made no reference to such reports."

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; applicable law; case law; competence; complaint allowed; consequence; criteria; decision; discretion; elements; exception; grounds; judicial review; limits; organisation; performance report; promotion; qualifications; right;



  • Judgment 2220


    95th Session, 2003
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant is asking for the execution of a judgment in which he was neither a party nor an intervener. He "claims that [that] judgment constitutes an exception to the general rule of res judicata because it is of "general" application. There is no such exception to the rule. The judgments of the Tribunal operate only in personam and not in rem. Notwithstanding the generality of the terms in which the Tribunal may dispose of a case before it, the judgment has effect only as between the parties to it. The complainant confuses the rule of res judicata with the rule of stare decisis. The former, which is a rule of law, applies absolutely when the necessary three identities of person, cause and object are present, which is not the case here. the latter rule, which is simply a matter of judicial practice or of comity, holds that, in general, the Tribunal will follow its own precedents and that the latter have authority even as against persons and organisations who were not party thereto, unless it is persuaded such precedents were wrong in law or in fact or that for any other compelling reason they should not be applied."

    Keywords:

    binding character; case law; complainant; effect; enforcement; exception; execution of judgment; general principle; grounds; intervention; judgment of the tribunal; limits; mistake of fact; organisation; practice; purport; request by a party; res judicata; right; same; same cause of action; same parties; same purpose; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2190


    94th Session, 2003
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The complainant's claim that the Tribunal should order the organization to undertake disciplinary investigations into the actions of [...] the staff member who allegedly entered a 'frivolous and dilatory' plea of irreceivability before the [Headquarters] Board [of Appeal], clearly cannot be allowed by the Tribunal, which has no jurisdiction to issue injunctions against international organisations, let alone to cast judgment on the means of defence used on behalf of such organisations in the context of internal appeal proceedings or litigation."

    Keywords:

    claim; competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; disciplinary procedure; inquiry; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply; right to reply;

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "The organization has a discretion to assess, in the context of its relations with a Member State, which are beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether it is appropriate to lift the immunity from legal process of its employees (see in this respect Judgments 933 and 1543)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 933, 1543

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; discretion; judicial review; member state; organisation; privileges and immunities; tribunal; waiver of immunity;



  • Judgment 2185


    94th Session, 2003
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    In its judgment on the complainant's first complaint the Tribunal gave the organisation the choice between reinstating the complainant or paying her a compensation. "The organization clearly chose not to reinstate the complainant. Consequently, the complainant's claim for reinstatement is irreceivable. It should also be noted that since [the organization] applied the second option of [that] judgment [...] to the complainant, she cannot seek to benefit from the first option as well."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1553

    Keywords:

    allowance; application for execution; claim; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; enforcement; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 2183


    94th Session, 2003
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    "The principle of the confidentiality of private messages stored in a professional e-mail account must be observed [...] In the event that access to an e-mail account becomes necessary for reasons of urgency or because of the prolonged absence of the account holder, it must be possible for organisations to open the account using appropriate technical safeguards. That state of necessity, justifying access to data which may be confidential, must be assessed with the utmost care."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; discretion; force majeure; general principle; international civil servant; leave; organisation; organisation's duties; safeguard;



  • Judgment 2170


    94th Session, 2003
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The Organisation withheld the complainant's salary increment on the grounds that more time was needed to assess her performance. It claims that the complainant refused to cooperate with evaluations. "If that were the case, it was the job of the administration to deal with the situation and not to act as if the complainant did not exist[...] while there is no doubt that an employee cannot obtain the right to an annual salary increment by deliberately sabotaging the reporting process, it is equally the case that an employer cannot deprive its staff of the increments to which they are entitled by failing to complete the necessary preliminary steps."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; failure to answer claim; grounds; increase; increment; increment withheld; international civil servant; organisation; organisation's duties; performance report; procedure; refusal; right; salary; time limit; work appraisal;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The Organisation withheld the complainant's salary increment on the grounds that more time was needed to assess her performance. The Tribunal concludes from the relevant provisions that "the requirement that an annual performance report be established prior to the scheduled date of the annual salary increment is a formal one. The salary increment [...] was not preceded by an evaluation [...] it is the Organisation's responsibility to see to it that [an annual performance] report is prepared on time. a staff member's right to an increment cannot be defeated by the organisation's failure to comply with its own rules."

    Keywords:

    applicable law; binding character; breach; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; date; grounds; increase; increment; increment withheld; international civil servant; organisation; organisation's duties; performance report; provision; refusal; right; salary; time limit; written rule;



  • Judgment 2142


    93rd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    "In a selection for a post, the most worthy candidates are selected 'in', i.e. to become members of staff, whereas in a mutually agreed separation exercise these are the very people who are most likely to be selected 'out' i.e. not to be released, in accordance with the requirements of the service. The interest of the organisation, which is paramount in each case, requires that the best candidates be employed and promoted in the first instance, and that they be retained in the organisation's service in the second."

    Keywords:

    agreed termination; appointment; candidate; competition; organisation; organisation's interest; post; procedure; promotion; qualifications;



  • Judgment 2136


    93rd Session, 2002
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "Regrettably, the [Organisation] has confined its submissions to a challenge as to the receivability of the complaints. As a result, the Tribunal is unable to render a final judgment. The Tribunal orders further submissions on the merits. Before ruling on the case, it invites the [Organisation] to submit its arguments within thirty days of the date of notification of this judgment. The Tribunal shall stay its judgment on the merits until it has received sufficient information to decide on the case (on this issue, see Judgment 499)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 499

    Keywords:

    case law; complaint; date of notification; further submissions on the merits; iloat; interlocutory order; judgment of the tribunal; limits; organisation; receivability of the complaint; reply; time limit;



  • Judgment 2125


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 5 and 6

    Extract:

    The complainant's request to have his contract extended beyond retirement age was not allowed. "On the merits, the Agency is undoubtedly right in pointing out that the Director General has discretion in the matter, over which the Tribunal has only a limited power of review. This discretion enables the Agency to depart from the rule governing the normal age of retirement. [...] Although the Director General can determine the interest of the Agency, his decisions must be based on clear and coherent reasons. In this case, the reason given - that the request for an extension contained no indication as to whether any of the criteria [on the basis of which he may authorise such an extension] had been satisfied - is not valid, and the reason based on 'rejuvenation' of the staff is too general to constitute a sufficient justification for the refusal of the complainant's request." The Tribunal considers that "this reason is not in itself reprehensible, but it could be used to justify a systematic refusal to depart from the rule governing the normal age of retirement. [By setting out the criteria] the [Agency] established for itself a number of rules which it must apply."

    Keywords:

    age limit; complaint allowed; contract; criteria; decision; definition; discretion; exception; executive head; extension; grounds; iloat; international civil servant; judicial review; organisation; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; patere legem; refusal; request by a party; retirement; written rule;



  • Judgment 2120


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 10 and 11

    Extract:

    A paragraph of a notice issued by the Organisation's secretariat stipulates that the spouse of a staff member shall normally not be employed in the same department as the staff member. The Tribunal considers that "the provision improperly discriminates between candidates for appointment based on their marital status and family relationship [...]. Discrimination on such grounds is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations, general principles of law and those which govern the international civil service, as well as international instruments on human rights. [...] All forms of improper discrimination are prohibited. What is improper discrimination? It is, at least in the employment context, the drawing of distinctions between staff members or candidates for appointment on the basis of irrelevant personal characteristics. Manifestly, the fact that two staff members may be married to each other is not relevant to their competence or the capacity of either one of them to fulfil their obligations. and, if it is thought that marital or intimate personal relationships between staff members may create management problems, such problems must be dealt with in ways that do not discriminate against either of them as a result of such relationships. The Tribunal notes that [the notice] as it is written, besides being too broad, is not even effective in dealing with the presumed possibility of undue influence or favouritism for it is silent on non-marital intimate relationships. It also fails to deal with marriages taking place after appointment".

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; assignment; breach; candidate; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; difference; equal treatment; family relationship; general principle; grounds; international civil servant; international civil service principles; international instrument; organisation; post; provision; publication; qualifications; same; staff member's duties; terms of appointment; un charter; universal declaration of human rights;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The complainant assumes that the provisions of a notice issued by the Organisation's secretariat, being subordinate legislation, are incompatible with the corresponding provisions of the primary legislation, namely the Staff Rules. The Tribunal considers that the notice "does not merely implement or clarify the Staff Rule; it purports to extend its reach substantially. It cannot stand."

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; definition; difference; enforcement; limits; organisation; precedence of rules; provision; publication; purport; purpose; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2097


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    Because of serious financial difficulties the organisation had to employ the complainants simultaneously under a fixed- term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. After being restored to their full-time fixed-term status they complained about the rates of remuneration received by them under their short-term contracts. "The principle which guarantees equal remuneration for work of equal value [...] is designed to prevent discrimination by employers between employees and to ensure that persons performing different work of the same or similar value shall receive equal remuneration. The organization is right to submit that its most common application is to the classification or grading of jobs [...]. That principle was never intended to apply so as to give rise to a claim by an individual to be paid at the same rate for all work which he or she performs: differential rates for work performed under different conditions, such as overtime to take a common example, are not discriminatory. In the present case there is nothing improper in the who's paying lower rates to persons such as the complainants doing temporary work on a short-term basis."

    Keywords:

    amount; budgetary reasons; condition; contract; difference; enforcement; equal treatment; fixed-term; general principle; international civil servant; organisation; overtime; part-time employment; post classification; safeguard; salary; same; scale; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainants worked simultaneously under a fixed-term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. "While it is unusual to find an employee working simultaneously for a single employer under two different contracts of employment, there is nothing inherently illegal about such an arrangement."

    Keywords:

    contract; difference; exception; fixed-term; international civil servant; organisation; part-time employment; same; short-term; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2095


    92nd Session, 2002
    Surveillance Authority of the European Free Trade Association
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "The determination of salary scales is discretionary [and] must be exercised within a framework of rules drawn from both the relevant statutory provisions and the general principles of clarity, stability and foreseeability defined in the case law (see, for example, Judgment 1821)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821

    Keywords:

    case law; complaint allowed; definition; discretion; general principle; iloat; limits; organisation; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules; written rule;

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


 
Last updated: 19.09.2019 ^ top