Judgment No. 3972
Decision
1. The decision of 25 November 2015 is set aside in the part regarding confirmation of dismissal for misconduct in accordance with Article 93(2)(f) of the Service Regulations, as is the same part of the earlier decision of 1 July 2015.
2. The case is sent back to the EPO in accordance with considerations 15 and 16 of the judgment.
3. The EPO shall pay the complainant 20,000 euros in moral damages.
4. It shall also pay him 1,000 euros in costs.
5. All other claims are dismissed.
Summary
The complainant impugns the decision to impose upon him the disciplinary measure of dismissal for misconduct.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
complaint allowed; decision quashed; misconduct; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure
Consideration 15
Extract:
While, in the present case, the Disciplinary Committee, but not the President when deciding initially to dismiss the complainant, did advert to the possibility that the complainant was suffering from a mental illness, it discounted entirely the possible nexus because the information available was insufficient. In circumstances such as the present, the President’s response to the complainant’s request for review was inadequate. The Tribunal concluded in Judgment 3887 that the EPO breached its duty of care towards the complainant in that case. So it is in this case as well. That duty of care would involve the EPO assessing whether the alleged misconduct can be entirely explained by the complainant’s mental illness, and also whether the complainant was entitled to benefits based on an invalidity stemming from his mental illness and perhaps his service with the EPO.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3887
Keywords
illness; disciplinary measure; duty of care
Consideration 16
Extract:
[I]t is appropriate to grant the same relief to the complainant in these proceedings as ordered by the Tribunal in Judgment 3887. Accordingly,the decision of 25 November 2015 will be set aside in the part regarding confirmation of dismissal for misconduct in accordance with Article 93(2)(f) of the Service Regulations, as will the same part of the earlier decision of 1 July 2015. The case will be sent back to the EPO for further consideration by the Disciplinary Committee, which will request a medical assessment of the complainant's health (even, if necessary, only on the basis of documents) and, if necessary, the convening of a Medical Committee.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3887
Keywords
case sent back to organisation
| 
