Judgment No. 1147

• Organization: European Patent Organisation (EPO)
• Date: 29.01.1992
• Original: French
• Judges: Ducoux, Pescatore, Carroll
• Full judgment text - Full judgment text (french)

Decision

1. THE IMPUGNED DECISION IS QUASHED.
2. THE ORGANISATION SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANT 1,000 DEUTSCHMARKS IN COSTS.

Consideration 4

Extract:

"The Staff Committee, which does not even have personality in law, may not itself appeal. But its members may nevertheless rely on their position as such to ensure observance of the Regulations. Indeed that is why Article 34(2) empowers them to enforce their rights. Were that not so the system of staff representation set up by the EPO would prove meaningless. The staff member has a direct interest in making the organisation respect his rights because he derives them directly from his status as such. The contingency is one that Article II of the Tribunal's Statute contemplates. If the EPO were right, a further effect would be to hamper the functioning of a body established under the Service Regulations and acting within the bounds of authority the Regulations set."

Reference(s)

ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II OF THE STATUTE
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 34(2) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS

Keywords

locus standi; status of complainant; competence of tribunal; staff regulations and rules; collective rights; staff union