ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

General principle (181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 900, 663, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 645, 209, 211, 664,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: General principle
Total judgments found: 222

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 | next >



  • Judgment 2216


    95th Session, 2003
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 8-9

    Extract:

    Article VI 1.01 of ESO's International Staff Rules reads as follows: " 'Every member of the personnel shall have the right to appeal against any decision of the Director General concerning himself.' Thus, a person who is not a "member of the personnel" has no right to launch an internal appeal and his or her only recourse is directly to the Tribunal."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE VI 1.01 OF ESO'S INTERNATIONAL STAFF RULES

    Keywords:

    cause of action; consequence; decision; direct appeal to tribunal; executive head; general principle; internal appeal; official; procedure before the tribunal; provision; right; right of appeal; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2184


    94th Session, 2003
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "It is the essence of secondment that the official concerned shall return to and resume his employment with the releasing organisation upon expiry of the agreed term. Since he was aware of such terms of employment, the complainant cannot be entitled to moral or compensatory damages."

    Keywords:

    allowance; fixed-term; general principle; moral injury; refusal; request by a party; secondment; staff member's duties; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2183


    94th Session, 2003
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    "The principle of the confidentiality of private messages stored in a professional e-mail account must be observed [...] In the event that access to an e-mail account becomes necessary for reasons of urgency or because of the prolonged absence of the account holder, it must be possible for organisations to open the account using appropriate technical safeguards. That state of necessity, justifying access to data which may be confidential, must be assessed with the utmost care."

    Keywords:

    discretion; force majeure; general principle; leave; official; organisation; organisation's duties; safeguard;



  • Judgment 2156


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The general principles which govern employment relationships in international organisations and which are also generally recognised in national labour legislation" recognise "that elected representatives of the staff enjoy specific rights and safeguards".

    Keywords:

    domestic law; general principle; international civil service principles; right; safeguard; staff representative;



  • Judgment 2147


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Service for National Agricultural Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "[The] invocation of the so-called 'first in, last out' principle, in effect a sort of non-contractual seniority clause, is unsupported by any authority and is inimical to the merit principle which underlies the law of the international civil service."

    Keywords:

    general principle; international civil service principles; output; priority; satisfactory service; seniority; termination of employment;



  • Judgment 2121


    93rd Session, 2002
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9 and 14

    Extract:

    The recommendation of the Personnel Advisory Panel not to renew the complainant's contract was followed. She submits that "at no time was she given a reason for the decision not to renew her appointment. The failure to cite a reason runs counter to principles embodied in a series of Tribunal judgments [...] to state that another body has recommended against renewal, without stating why, is not enough to satisfy the Tribunal that a reason for such non-renewal was given."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; advisory body; case law; complainant; contract; duty to substantiate decision; evidence; general principle; grounds; iloat; non-renewal of contract; recommendation;



  • Judgment 2120


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 10-11

    Extract:

    A paragraph of a notice issued by the Organisation's secretariat stipulates that the spouse of a staff member shall normally not be employed in the same department as the staff member. The Tribunal considers that "the provision improperly discriminates between candidates for appointment based on their marital status and family relationship [...]. Discrimination on such grounds is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations, general principles of law and those which govern the international civil service, as well as international instruments on human rights. [...] All forms of improper discrimination are prohibited. What is improper discrimination? It is, at least in the employment context, the drawing of distinctions between staff members or candidates for appointment on the basis of irrelevant personal characteristics. Manifestly, the fact that two staff members may be married to each other is not relevant to their competence or the capacity of either one of them to fulfil their obligations. and, if it is thought that marital or intimate personal relationships between staff members may create management problems, such problems must be dealt with in ways that do not discriminate against either of them as a result of such relationships. The Tribunal notes that [the notice] as it is written, besides being too broad, is not even effective in dealing with the presumed possibility of undue influence or favouritism for it is silent on non-marital intimate relationships. It also fails to deal with marriages taking place after appointment".

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; assignment; breach; candidate; competition; definition; difference; equal treatment; family relationship; general principle; grounds; international civil service principles; international instrument; official; organisation; post; provision; publication; qualifications; staff member's duties; terms of appointment; un charter; universal declaration of human rights;



  • Judgment 2097


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    Because of serious financial difficulties the organisation had to employ the complainants simultaneously under a fixed- term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. After being restored to their full-time fixed-term status they complained about the rates of remuneration received by them under their short-term contracts. "The principle which guarantees equal remuneration for work of equal value [...] is designed to prevent discrimination by employers between employees and to ensure that persons performing different work of the same or similar value shall receive equal remuneration. The organization is right to submit that its most common application is to the classification or grading of jobs [...]. That principle was never intended to apply so as to give rise to a claim by an individual to be paid at the same rate for all work which he or she performs: differential rates for work performed under different conditions, such as overtime to take a common example, are not discriminatory. In the present case there is nothing improper in the who's paying lower rates to persons such as the complainants doing temporary work on a short-term basis."

    Keywords:

    amount; budgetary reasons; condition; contract; difference; enforcement; equal treatment; fixed-term; general principle; official; organisation; overtime; part-time employment; post classification; safeguard; salary; scale; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2095


    92nd Session, 2002
    Surveillance Authority of the European Free Trade Association
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "The determination of salary scales is discretionary [and] must be exercised within a framework of rules drawn from both the relevant statutory provisions and the general principles of clarity, stability and foreseeability defined in the case law (see, for example, Judgment 1821)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821

    Keywords:

    case law; definition; discretion; general principle; iloat; limits; organisation; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 2092


    92nd Session, 2002
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "It is elementary that where a reason is given for taking a decision which is adverse to the interests of a staff member the organisation is held to that reason and cannot later seek to justify its action on other grounds."

    Keywords:

    cause of action; general principle; grounds; organisation's duties;



  • Judgment 2081


    92nd Session, 2002
    European Molecular Biology Laboratory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The issue to be resolved [...] is whether the complainants are barred from objecting to the [organisation]'s failure to take into account the corrected level of salaries for 1995 in determining the salaries for 1996 and 1997, because they did not first challenge their salaries for 1996 and 1997 [... ] when they were originally fixed. But in view of the circumstances, to make such a demand on them would be pedantic and wanting in good faith. As the parties were aware at the time, the salary levels for 1995 were under challenge [...] Moreover, any change in salary levels will ordinarily affect pay in subsequent years. The staff therefore had good reason to believe that a change in pay for 1995 would have a "knock on" effect on the level of salaries used as a basis for calculating pay in the future. Moreover, the [organisation] could be in no doubt that this was what staff would expect. In these circumstances, and having given them no indication to the contrary, the [organisation] could not require staff to challenge each new determination of their salaries on the conditional and hypothetical basis that any successful challenge to the remuneration for a previous year (in this case 1995) should automatically be carried through to the salary levels taken into account in subsequent years."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; amount; consequence; formal requirements; general principle; good faith; legitimate expectation; official; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; salary; time bar;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "Consistent precedent has it that an organisation is ordinarily free to determine the pay of its staff, provided that it respects certain requirements arising from general principles of international civil service law [...] Furthermore, if the organisation has a rule granting certain rights to staff members in relation to their level of salary, it may not depart from that rule in individual decisions without amending it in accordance with the prescribed procedure."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; amount; case law; condition; discretion; formal requirements; general principle; individual decision; international civil service principles; official; organisation; organisation's duties; provision; right; salary; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2066


    91st Session, 2001
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "There is breach of equal treatment only where staff members in an identical or comparable position in fact and in law receive different treatment from the organisation. Consequently, the right to equal treatment does not preclude amendment of a rule or the way in which it is applied. A new rule could be less favourable than the old one, and hence be subject to challenge, without necessarily impairing the right to equal treatment."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; breach; definition; difference; enforcement; equal treatment; general principle; right; written rule;



  • Judgment 2060


    91st Session, 2001
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "Candidates who apply for a post to be filled by competition, whatever their hopes of success may be, are entitled to have their applications considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair competition. An organisation must be careful to abide by the rules on selection and when the process proves flawed, the Tribunal will quash any resulting appointment, albeit on the understanding that the organisation must 'shield' the successful candidate from any injury (see for example Judgments 1990 and 2020 and the others cited therein)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1990, 2020

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; case law; competition; competition cancelled; condition; due process; equal treatment; general principle; good faith; injury; international civil service principles; post; qualifications;



  • Judgment 2028


    90th Session, 2001
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal does not dispute the principle of delegation of authority (see Judgment 1386 [...]); however, when a complainant calls for proof that power has in fact been delegated to a specific person, it is a matter for the organisation to produce such proof."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1386

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; complainant; delegated authority; disclosure of evidence; evidence; general principle; organisation's duties; request by a party;



  • Judgment 2023


    90th Session, 2001
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The principle of equal pay for work of equal value applies to the grading of posts [...] Step increases within a grade are not contrary to the principle of equal pay."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: PART II, SECTION 1, PARAGRAPHS 20 AND 30.1 WHO MANUAL

    Keywords:

    applicable law; equal treatment; general principle; increment; post classification; salary;



  • Judgment 2021


    90th Session, 2001
    International Office of Epizootics
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    "Lack of impartiality in a tribunal is a serious matter and an allegation of this sort should be neither made nor taken lightly. It is, like any other breach of the principles of natural justice, a proper ground for seeking review of a judgment."

    Keywords:

    admissible grounds for review; application for review; bias; burden of proof; general principle;

    Consideration 22

    Extract:

    The complainant fears that the opinion of a member of the Tribunal was tainted with bias since he has the same nationality as a few of the organisation's senior officers. "Applications for review are normally heard by the same panel which rendered the original decision; a complainant cannot, by making wholly frivolous and unsubstantiated allegations force one or more members of the panel to recuse themselves."

    Keywords:

    application for review; bias; general principle; nationality;



  • Judgment 2009


    90th Session, 2001
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The complainant was suspended without pay for three months after being accused of making a false declaration and submitting false information to a court of law. The Joint Disciplinary Board found that there was sufficient evidence to prove his wrongdoing. "The Tribunal is satisfied that the Joint Disciplinary Board was entitled, having weighed the evidence, to draw the conclusions it did. It found that the complainant's explanations were not credible and rejected them. Where doubt does not exist, the question of the benefit of the doubt does not arise. So the complainant cannot succeed on the plea that his employer was bound to accept that he had made a mistake. The Board was fully justified in its findings."

    Keywords:

    appraisal of evidence; benefit of doubt; conduct; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; evidence; fitness for international civil service; general principle; misconduct; misrepresentation;



  • Judgment 2006


    90th Session, 2001
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    The complainant contends that based on a recently published circular, his promotion should have been made retroactive to the date he took up his new duties. "However, to give retroactive effect to [the] circular would not be possible since according to customary methods of interpretation any action prescribed in a text is deemed to be of immediate effect. There is no presumption of retroactive effect.' (Judgment 742 [...]). Indeed, there can be no retroactive application of the rights sought by the complainant, and his status results only from the publication of the circular in question. The charge of arbitrariness would be tenable if there were no basis for applying the circular to the case of the complainant, but, as shown above, the scope of the text explicitly covered his situation."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 742

    Keywords:

    bias; date; effective date; general principle; interpretation; non-retroactivity; promotion; publication; right; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 1980


    89th Session, 2000
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 5 and 10

    Extract:

    "The complainants contend that Judgment 1663 was not properly executed. According to a general principle, a judgment ordinarily affects only the parties to the suit and applies only to the issues raised in it. The Tribunal has applied that principle in judgments concerning monetary claims by staff members of organisations (see Judgment 1935, [...] under 4 to 6). The complainants were not parties to the proceedings that led to Judgment 1663 and so are not entitled to benefit from it unless they can invoke some special ground."
    The complainants were unable to do so. Therefore the Tribunal found that, "having no locus standi to apply for the execution of Judgment 1663, the complainants cannot plead that the execution of the judgment was formally flawed."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1663, 1935

    Keywords:

    execution of judgment; flaw; formal flaw; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; res judicata; same cause of action; same parties;



  • Judgment 1979


    89th Session, 2000
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "Consistent precedent holds that, since judgments carry the authority of res judicata only for the parties to a dispute (see Judgment 1935 [...]), complainants may not put forward claims for the whole staff, but only for themselves. The complaints are irreceivable insofar as they address the position of persons who are not parties to this suit."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1935

    Keywords:

    binding character; case law; claim; general principle; judgment of the tribunal; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; res judicata; same parties;

    Consideration 5(H)

    Extract:

    "The rule against retroactivity prevents an organisation from applying retroactively to staff a rule which is unfavourable to them. In order to determine whether a measure is unfavourable its overall effects must be assessed."

    Keywords:

    general principle; non-retroactivity; written rule;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 | next >


 
Last updated: 07.03.2024 ^ top