Judgment No. 487
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Neither the Regulations nor the Rules state what provisions apply when absence from duty which is claimed as sick leave is not authorised ex post facto. In particular the conditions for applying [a rule] which relates to unauthorised absence and prescribed disciplinary action, are not fulfilled. Accordingly, a case in which sick leave is not authorised ex post facto need not be assimilated to one of ordinary unauthorised absence."
Keywords
unauthorised absence; illness
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant's absence from duty for which the organization's medical officer thought the application of sick leave unjustified was set against annual leave; the complainant contends that it was in fact a disciplinary measure tainted with abuse of authority. "In the circumstances of this case the application of the [material rule] by analogy and the consequent exclusion of [another rule] which would have entailed disciplinary action [...] constitutes no abuse of authority, since that authority was not exercised for any unlawful purpose."
Keywords
enforcement; analogy; provision; unauthorised absence; illness; annual leave; sick leave; misuse of authority; refusal; abuse of power
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The organization's medical officer [...] who examined the complainant [...] delayed [...] reporting in writing to the personnel office and it is true that the administrative process is open to criticism on that account, even supposing that because of doubts over the case he decided [...] to telephone [...] the complainant's own doctor [...]. But the administrative delay does not in itself constitute a flaw which warrants quashing the decision."
Keywords
lack of injury; administrative delay; medical consultant; medical opinion; flaw
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Tribunal finds wilful harassment neither in the refusal to extend the period of sick leave nor - on account of the considerations relied on by the administration - in the summons [...] to the complainant [...] to see the [organization's] medical officer on the same day, nor in the refusal to hold an independent medical examination - a procedure for which there is no provision in the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. On the contrary, the organization acted in the normal exercise of its authority."
Keywords
expert inquiry; extension of contract; medical examination; sick leave; refusal
| 
