Judgment No. 25
Decision
THE TRIBUNAL REJECTS THE COMPLAINT, ORDERS THE DEFENDANT ORGANIZATION TO PAY THE SUM OF US $200 AS A SHARE IN THE COSTS OF DEFENCE CLAIMED BY THE COMPLAINANT.
Consideration (A)
Extract:
"The offer of a new appointment, coupled with a transfer, exempts the organization from having to give advance notice of the expiration of the current appointment."
Keywords
organisation's duties; transfer; contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; notice
Consideration (A)
Extract:
"An offer was made to the complainant to extend his appointment and to transfer him [to the field]. The complainant made his acceptance of this offer subject to conditions the Director-General felt unable to accept. [The] non-renewal of the complainant's appointment did not violate [...] any of the relevant provisions of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules."
Keywords
field; transfer; contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; refusal
Consideration (A)
Extract:
"The Director-General [...] enjoys discretionary powers in respect of the transfer of staff members to posts other than those to which they are initially assigned [...]. A refusal to accept a transfer may raise obstacles to the extension of an engagement beyond its original date of termination."
Keywords
transfer; contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; discretion; refusal
Consideration (A)
Extract:
"The claim submitted by the complainant in respect of losses incurred in the sale of his furniture and car, separation pay for his servants, his temporary housing, and the loss of earnings which he sustained is not warranted by any irregularity [...]. No provision [...] provides for the payment of an indemnity on such grounds [...]. The said claim is therefore devoid of any foundation in law or in fact."
Keywords
claim; injury; cause of action; no cause of action; personal effects
Consideration (C)
Extract:
"The opinion expressed by the Headquarters Board of Inquiry and Appeal concerning 'the unfortunate mishandling of the various steps taken in this case' was likely to encourage the complainant to submit his complaint to the Tribunal. [...] Having regard to the particular circumstances of the case, it appears justified, as an exceptional measure and without contravening the jurisprudence of the Tribunal, to grant the complainant an indemnity as a share in the costs incurred by him."
Keywords
organisation; exception; costs; negligence
| 
