Judgment No. 1189
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant is objecting to the local status he was granted upon recruitment. The Tribunal observes that on his application form he himself stated that he had been living in Geneva, which was his duty station, for several years. In signing that form he stated that the information he had given was "true, complete and correct". The Tribunal concludes that since he had thus declared at the time of recruitment that he had been residing in Geneva for several years, "the complainant is now estopped from contending that he was wrongly given such status".
Keywords
good faith; duty station; local status; non-local status; residence; staff member's duties
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant's request to have his designated home changed was turned down. He says that at the time of his recruitment there was an agreement with the administration to give him local status to avoid his running the risk of returning to his home country. "The argument fails. [...] The ILO could never have forced him to go [back to his home country], the taking of home leave being a right, not a duty".
Keywords
amendment to the rules; home leave; home; staff member's duties; refusal; right
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The principle of equal treatment applies only where staff in the same position both in law and in fact are shown not to have been treated alike."
Keywords
identical facts; general principle; equal treatment
| 
