Judgment No. 2146
Decision
1. THE IMPUGNED DECISION IS SET ASIDE INSOFAR AS IT CONFIRMS THAT THE COMPLAINANT'S ABSENCE FOR THE PERIOD OF 16 FEBRUARY TO 10 MARCH 1999 WAS UNAUTHORISED AND DENIES THE CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.
2. THE EPO IS ORDERED TO RESCIND ANY PENALTIES IMPOSED ON THE COMPLAINANT IN RESPECT OF HIS ABSENCES FROM WORK DURING THE PERIOD FROM 16 FEBRUARY TO 10 APRIL 1999.
3. IT SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANT 1,000 EUROS AS MORAL DAMAGES AND 500 EUROS IN COSTS.
4. ALL OTHER CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED.
Consideration 23
Extract:
The Invalidity Committee was constituted of two doctors respectively appointed by the organization and the complainant and of a third member chosen by mutual agreement between the first two doctors. The doctor appointed by the complainant resigned. He appointed another but challenges the fact that the third member was not rechosen. "It is clear [...] that if a member is replaced, the appointment should be by the same person or persons who originally appointed the member who has left. The complainant is wrong to liken the Invalidity Committee to an arbitral body that must always have representation from each side and must always be presided by someone chosen by the parties' representatives. The Invalidity Committee is a statutory body and once regularly constituted, it has the powers vested in it by the rules. The appointments to it do not become invalid simply by reason of the departure of a member."
Keywords
resignation; medical board; pension entitlements; disability benefit; invalidity; consequence; composition of the internal appeals body
| 
