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

Retaliation (711,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Retaliation
Total judgments found: 4

  • Judgment 4096

    127th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the failure to act on his request to update his terms of reference and the subsequent failure to take interim measures to protect him from harassment and retaliation by his supervisors.

    Judgment keywords


    harassment; post description; retaliation;

  • Judgment 4005

    126th Session, 2018
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her complaint of harassment.

    Consideration 7


    [T]he fact of reporting unsatisfactory conduct may be relevant in a harassment case alleging retaliation.


    harassment; retaliation; unsatisfactory service;

  • Judgment 3748

    123rd Session, 2017
    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 withdraw an offer of employment allegedly made to her by the Chief Procurement Officer.

    Consideration 6


    It is incumbent on the complainant to establish that the actions or conduct complained of was retaliatory (see Judgment 3415, consideration 11), though it can be accepted that evidence of personal prejudice is often concealed and such prejudice can be inferred from surrounding circumstances (see Judgment 1775, consideration 7).


    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1775, 3415


    personal prejudice; retaliation;

  • Judgment 3142

    113th Session, 2012
    Energy Charter Conference
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 15


    [T]he Secretary-General committed an error of law in treating the situation as “serious” on the basis that there had been a finding that harassment had not occurred. It is entirely proper to treat as serious a situation where it is subsequently found that an allegation of harassment has no factual basis. In that situation, there has been a false accusation. In the present case, the ad hoc board found that there was a factual basis to the complainant’s claim, albeit without identifying the precise conduct involved. It found that there had been no harassment solely on the basis that the complainant’s supervisor neither knew nor ought to have known that his conduct – conduct that the Secretary-General said that he deplored – was unwelcome. And it did so simply on the basis that she had not told him so. Where behaviour is such as to satisfy all the elements in the definition of “harassment”, save knowledge on the part of the perpetrator, it is entirely proper for a staff member to make a claim of harassment. And a decision not to renew that staff member’s contract on the ground that a complaint of harassment, although properly made, was not sustained because the perpetrator neither knew nor ought reasonably to have known his conduct was unwelcome gives rise to an inference of retaliation. More particularly is that so where, as here, the contract of the person who engaged in the conduct concerned was renewed quite independently of the outcome of the investigation and the only real criticism that could be made of the person whose contract was not renewed was that she did not make her feelings known and did not make an “earlier attempt to resolve difficulties [...] in a less confrontational manner”.


    harassment; non-renewal of contract; retaliation;

Last updated: 07.11.2019 ^ top