Judgment No. 960
Decision
THE COMPLAINT AND THE APPLICATION TO INTERVENE ARE DISMISSED.
Consideration 4
Extract:
As to res judicata, "a judgment that dismisses a complaint has only relative force in that it is binding only on those who are parties to the case."
Keywords
res judicata; judgment of the tribunal; effect
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Although a complainant may put forward a new plea at any point in proceedings before the Tribunal, he may not in his rejoinder enlarge the scope of his claims as stated in his original complaint."
Keywords
new claim; receivability of the complaint; new plea; rejoinder
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The notice [...] that prompted her internal appeal cannot in itself afford grounds for a complaint to the Tribunal since it merely showed the amount of the benefit she would get according to the option she preferred, and that amount is determined by the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. if, as the ILO maintains, that is how the notice is to be construed, the Tribunal may not review the lawfulness of the decision." However, the complainant takes a different line. The complainant's objections, based on Article 8.2 of the ILO Staff Regulations, concern not the amount of her pension, but the fact that account was taken of the new scale of pensionable remuneration which the Director-General had brought in as from 1 April 1985. Therefore, the Tribunal is competent.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 8.2 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords
decision; competence; competence of tribunal; amount; scale; pension; unjspf; pension entitlements; pensionable remuneration
Consideration 5
Extract:
The organisation argues that the complainant's internal appeal against the application of the amended scale of pensionable remuneration was time-barred. The plea fails. The Tribunal holds that "although [the complainant] must have known for over two years that amending the scale would have consequences when she left she could not know what the financial consequences would be."
Keywords
decision; receivability of the complaint; internal appeal; time limit; start of time limit; time bar; amount; amendment to the rules; scale; separation from service; retirement; pension; pensionable remuneration; consequence; reduction of salary
Consideration 6
Extract:
The purpose of the present complaint is the same as the purpose of the complaints which lead to Judgment 832. The rationale of that judgment and the ruling hold good. The Tribunal declares that "the ILO acted lawfully in adopting the new scale as from 1 April 1985, its decision was not in breach of any promise and did not have retroactive effect, and although it did cause the complainant financial injury the reasons were objective and the extent of the injury admissible."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 832
Keywords
acquired right; non-retroactivity; amendment to the rules; scale; pension; pension entitlements; pensionable remuneration; reduction of salary
| 
