Judgment No. 469
Decision
1. The decision of the Director of 25 August 1980 is quashed;
2. The Organization is ordered to pay to the complainant the indemnity due under Staff Rule 1050.4;
3. The Organization is ordered to pay the complainant 2,500 United States dollars in costs; and
4. The remaining claims are dismissed.
Consideration 5
Extract:
If an advance notice was necessary it was given out of time and thus the appointment was not terminated. If it was not necessary, the appointment terminated automatically. "Presumably, it must be the view of the organization that the failure to give notice in time does prevent the automatic termination, but preserves the right of the organization to give a month's notice at any time thereafter, irrespective of whether the circumstances are normal or abnormal. The Tribunal cannot adopt this construction of the rule."
Keywords
organisation's duties; contract; extension of contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; notice; consequence; date
Consideration 4
Extract:
Expiry of contract on 30 November. The complainant was informed of the abolition of her post with effect from 1 February and the extension of her contract until 31 January. "The fixed term of the complainant's contract being for a year, when the last date [one month before the end of the contract, the time limit stipulated by the Regulations] passed without notification of non-renewal, the effect was to extend the appointment until 30 November [of the following year]. The notice to extend until 31 January [of that same year], which was never accepted by the complainant, was therefore ineffective, and her appointment was terminated prematurely by the abolition of her post."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1050.4 OF THE PAHO STAFF RULES
Keywords
complainant; contract; extension of contract; fixed-term; abolition of post; non-renewal of contract; notice; refusal
Consideration 7
Extract:
"It is true that the abolition of a post does not automatically terminate the holder's appointment and therefore does not automatically attract an indemnity under [the applicable rule]. Does this give the organization the option of terminating the appointment under another rule ? In the circumstances of this case it is unnecessary for the Tribunal to answer that question." It is the provision establishing an indemnity in the event of post abolition that is applicable in the instant case.
Keywords
applicable law; contract; fixed-term; abolition of post; non-renewal of contract; material damages
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Staff Rules provide both for automatic termination of contract and advance notice. The Tribunal has consistently found that a decision not to re-appoint is required, as well as notice before the prescribed date. "To interpret the rule as terminating the appointment automatically on the expiry date whether or not a notification was given would not only do violence to the text by rendering the provision for notification otiose, but would also be unreasonable and unfair [...]."
Keywords
case law; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules; interpretation; provision; contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; notice; date
| 
