ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By session > 118th Session

Judgment No. 3374


1. The impugned decision is set aside.
2. The complainant’s post shall be reclassified at grade G.7, with all the legal consequences that this entails, as indicated in consideration 14 of the judgment.
3. The ILO shall pay the complainant compensation in the amount of 10,000 Swiss francs for moral damages.
4. It shall also pay him the sum of 1,000 francs in costs.


The Tribunal set aside for procedural flaw the impugned decision rejecting the complainant’s request for the reclassification of his post.

Judgment keywords


complaint allowed; decision quashed; post classification

Consideration 14


"In view of the setting aside of the impugned decision, the Director-General must be deemed to have failed to take a decision within the time limit [...]. It must therefore be concluded [...] that the [...] recommendation becomes effective ipso jure. The complainant must therefore be reclassified retroactively [...]."


time bar; decision quashed

Consideration 17


"As the Tribunal has consistently held, an organisation has an obligation to ensure that internal appeal procedures move forward with reasonable speed (see, for example, Judgment 2197, under 33)."


ILOAT Judgment(s): 2197


reasonable time; due process

Considerations 5-6


The ILO argues that the complaint is irreceivable on the ground that the complainant, who puts forward arguments “pertain[ing] to an alleged procedural flaw”, could not appeal directly to the Tribunal but should have filed a grievance with the JAAB, as required by the provisions of paragraph 22 of Circular No. 639 (Rev.2), Series 6, of 31 August 2005.
However, the Tribunal considers, without needing to rule on the applicability in the presence case of the aforementioned provisions, that this objection to receivability must be rejected since it has been established, from the content of the file, that the final decision of 29 July 2011 explicitly stated that the complainant could file an appeal with the Tribunal in accordance with its Statute and Rules. This statement must, in any event, be construed as an authorisation to appeal directly to the Tribunal without pursuing any other internal means of redress.


direct appeal to tribunal

Last updated: 02.09.2020 ^ top