Judgment No. 3827
The complaint is dismissed.
The complainant challenges the refusal to grant her the lump sum paid to servants whose application to resign is accepted.
terminal entitlements; complaint dismissed
The complainant points out that [...] the Organisation had proposed an amicable settlement of the dispute. She regards this proposal as acknowledgement of the unlawful nature of the decision [...].
This submission is misconceived. The Organisation’s proposal to resolve the dispute by means of a settlement, which did not in itself imply any admission of liability, could very well have been prompted by a wish to avoid the trouble of pursuing litigation with an employee who had retired.
settlement out of court
It must be recalled that the Tribunal is not competent to rule on the merits of [the Organisation]’s choices in respect of its staff management, for they form part of the general employment policy that an organisation is free to pursue in accordance with its general interests (see Judgment 3225, under 6).
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3225
discretion; organisation's interest
As the Tribunal has consistently held, an administrative authority, when dealing with a claim, must generally base itself on the provisions in force at the time it takes its decision and not on those in force at the time the claim was submitted. Only where this approach is clearly excluded by the new provisions, or where it would result in a breach of the requirements of the principles of good faith, the non-retroactivity of administrative decisions and the protection of acquired rights, will the above rule not apply (see Judgments 2459, under 9, and 2985, under 15).
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2459, 2985
acquired right; written rule