Judgment No. 4298
1. The impugned decision of 20 July 2018 is set aside.
2. The matter is remitted to the OPCW in order for a newly constituted ABCC panel to consider it and to make, on the basis of Professor V.ís report, a recommendation to the Director-General on whether the complainant incurred a disability which was attributable to the performance of official duties on behalf of the Organisation as a result of his treatment by the OPCW during the arbitration process.
3. The Director-General shall consider the ABCCís recommendation and shall take a new decision on the complainantís claim within 90 days from the delivery of this judgment.
4. The OPCW shall pay the complainant 15,000 euros in moral damages.
5. The OPCW shall pay the complainant 8,000 euros in costs.
6. All other claims are dismissed.
The complainant challenges the decision to reject his claim for compensation for a service-incurred disability.
complaint allowed; case sent back to organisation; illness; service-incurred
[A]n organisation is entitled to adopt a position in relation to any claim of a staff member or former staff member for a benefit. If the organisation believes on reasonable grounds, that the benefit is unavailable, it is open to the organisation to resist the claim. But that is not a license to take all or any unreasonable point in doing so.
If, in truth, the OPCW had been uncertain about what the Tribunalís orders in Judgment 3854 meant or had considered they deviated from the issue requiring determination, it could have sought the Tribunalís assistance (see, for example, Judgment 3003, consideration 31). It did not do so. The OPCW, in advancing this submission, breached its duty to execute the Tribunalís judgment in good faith (see, for example, Judgment 3823, consideration 4). The complainant is entitled to compensation for this breach (see Judgment 2684, consideration 10).
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2684, 3003, 3823, 3854
execution of judgment; good faith