Judgment No. 358
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Considerations
Extract:
"A decision by the Director [...] to extend a staff member's appointment beyond the age limit set in the Staff Regulations is purely discretionary" and the Tribunal may interfere with such a decision only in exceptional circumstances set out in the case law.
Keywords
contract; retirement; age limit; judicial review; discretion; extension beyond retirement age
Considerations
Extract:
"Although the Director is empowered to extend a staff member's appointment to the age of 65, he is in no case bound to do so. He may exercise that authority to allow an exception only in the interests of the [organisation], not in the exclusive interests of the staff member. In deciding on the complainant's case he would have to bear in mind the possibility that the complainant might obtain a pension, but that was only one fact to be taken into account among others."
Keywords
staff member's interest; contract; retirement; age limit; pension; contributory service; discretion; organisation's interest; extension beyond retirement age
Considerations
Extract:
One decision was signed by the chief of personnel; another by a representative of the Director and on the Director's behalf. "[B]oth those officials were qualified to take the decision in the place of the Director. Hence the complainant cannot properly contend that the decisions were taken without authority. Besides, the decision [...] to dismiss the complainant's second [...] appeal, which conforms with the two earlier decisions, was signed by the Director himself."
Keywords
competence; decision-maker
| 
