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

Due process (187,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Due process
Total judgments found: 170

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



  • Judgment 2667


    104th Session, 2008
    World Tourism Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The duty to act independently and impartially is incumbent not only on the authority competent for issuing the final formal decision in proceedings, but also on bodies responsible for giving an advisory opinion or for making a recommendation to this authority, a fortiori where the recommendation is a formal part of the decision-making process (see Judgment 2315, under 27)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2315

    Keywords:

    advisory body; advisory opinion; condition; decision; disciplinary procedure; due process; independence; procedure before the tribunal; recommendation;



  • Judgment 2642


    103rd Session, 2007
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "In Judgment 2552 the Tribunal pointed out that an accusation of harassment 'requires that an international organisation both investigate the matter thoroughly and accord full due process and protection to the person accused'. Its duty to a person who makes a claim of harassment requires that the claim be investigated both promptly and thoroughly, that the facts be determined objectively and in their overall context (see Judgment 2524), that the law be applied correctly, that due process be observed and that the person claiming, in good faith, to have been harassed not be stigmatised or victimised on that account (see Judgment 1376)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1376, 2524, 2552

    Keywords:

    due process; good faith; harassment; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; safeguard;



  • Judgment 2599


    102nd Session, 2007
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal notes that there is no evidence to prove that the complainant was given any kind of access to the report on which the Director General is said to have based her decision to dismiss her.
    It may be concluded from the above and from the evidence in the file that the impugned decision was taken in breach of the safeguards regarding the provision of proper conditions for probation, resulting from the rules and regulations, from general principles of law and from the Tribunal's case law, and, in particular, in breach of the complainant's right to be heard.
    The impugned decision must therefore be quashed."

    Keywords:

    breach; case law; due process; duty to inform; general principle; grounds; organisation's duties; probationary period; report; right to reply; safeguard; termination of employment;



  • Judgment 2552


    101st Session, 2006
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    An accusation of harassment "requires that an international organisation both investigate the matter thoroughly and accord full due process and protection to the person accused."

    Keywords:

    due process; harassment; inquiry; investigation; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; safeguard;



  • Judgment 2524


    100th Session, 2006
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 31

    Extract:

    To advance serious allegations that have not been properly investigated against an official before a body that must issue a decision or recommendation concerning that official amounts to "serious failure of due process and want of fairness and good faith".

    Keywords:

    advisory body; advisory opinion; breach; decision; due process; equity; good faith; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; right to reply;



  • Judgment 2522


    100th Session, 2006
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal concludes that the internal appeal proceedings were not conducted with due diligence or with the care owed by an international organisation to its staff. The complainant had reason to believe that the Agency was making every effort to hamper the proceedings to prevent them from being concluded within a reasonable time. He was not informed of the final outcome of his internal appeal until nearly two months after the Director General had taken his final decision. Moreover, the latter replied to the complainant's request for review more than three months after the request was submitted, and only after an appeal had been lodged with the Joint Appeals Board. The Tribunal concludes from the above that the complainant suffered moral injury."

    Keywords:

    decision; delay; due process; evidence; internal appeal; late decision; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; staff member's interest; time limit;



  • Judgment 2515


    100th Session, 2006
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    "The decision to advertise the complainant's post [...] was in substance a decision to dismiss him from that post. No reason was ever provided for that decision [...] In the circumstances, it must be concluded that the decision resulted from the management review [conducted by the Chief of the Personnel and Social Protection Department]. In this regard, it is necessary only to observe that that review involved a denial of due process in that the complainant was not told precisely who had criticised his performance or conduct, nor was he told exactly what they had said. Moreover, he was not given an opportunity to question them or to rebut what was put against him. The decision to dismiss him from his post thus involved a serious breach of the requirements of due process."

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; breach; competition; contract; decision; due process; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; post; post held by the complainant; right to reply; unsatisfactory service; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2513


    100th Session, 2006
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal notes [...] that in the absence of special circumstances such as a compelling need to preserve confidentiality, internal appellate bodies such as the [Joint Appeals Board] must strictly observe the rules of due process and natural justice and that those rules normally require a full opportunity for interested parties to be present at the hearing of witnesses and to make full answer in defence."

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; applicable law; confidential evidence; due process; exception; general principle; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; right to reply; testimony;



  • Judgment 2432


    99th Session, 2005
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal takes the view that, before taking a final decision, any collegiate body must meet to deliberate. A meeting may not be absolutely necessary, however, [...]if the Committee members agree on all the points of their individual reports.
    In this case, in view of the uncertainty regarding the period referred to in assessing the seriousness of the complainant's illness, of the fact that she was suffering from afflictions requiring treatment by different medical specialists and of the differences of opinion which emerged regarding the seriousness of the illness and the incapacity it caused, the Tribunal considers that the Invalidity Committee should have met before issuing its final decision. Since no meeting took place, the procedure leading up to the impugned decision is flawed even though the practitioner appointed by the complainant did not raise any objection. The decision must therefore be set aside and the case sent back to the Organisation for reconsideration of the question [...]"

    Keywords:

    advisory body; condition; due process; invalidity; procedural flaw; remand;



  • Judgment 2414


    98th Session, 2005
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    "In Judgment 2170 the Tribunal described the requirement of Staff Rule 12.1.5 that an annual performance report be established prior to the scheduled date of a salary increment as 'a formal one' which had to be complied with. It is important to explain why that was so. A staff member whose service is not considered satisfactory is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service so that steps can be taken to remedy the situation. Moreover, he or she is entitled to have objectives set in advance so that he or she will know the yardstick by which future performance will be assessed. These are fundamental aspects of the duty of an international organisation to act in good faith towards its staff members and to respect their dignity. That is why it was said in Judgment 2170 that an organisation must 'conduct its affairs in a way that allows its employees to rely on the fact that [its rules] will be followed'."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Rule 12.1.5 of the ITU
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2170

    Keywords:

    criteria; due process; duty to inform; good faith; increase; increment; interpretation; organisation's duties; output; patere legem; performance evaluation; performance report; respect for dignity; salary; staff regulations and rules; time limit; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;

    Consideration 24

    Extract:

    "The fundamental considerations which lead to the conclusion that an organisation must comply with the rules which it has established also dictate the conclusion that it cannot base an adverse decision on a staff member's unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance." That is true for salary increments as well as for decisions not to convert or renew a contract.

    Keywords:

    contract; decision; due process; fixed-term; grounds; increase; increment; non-renewal of contract; patere legem; permanent appointment; salary; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 2354


    97th Session, 2004
    World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 6-7

    Extract:

    The complainant's post as a translator was abolished and his appointment was terminated. "According to the [applicable] provisions, the Secretary General was obliged to consult the Staff Committee before terminating [an] appointment. The Tribunal considers that this obligation to consult - which must not be seen as just an unnecessary formality, even though the Secretary General is not bound by the opinion of the advisory body - is not fulfilled unless the advisory body is in such a position that it can give an opinion independently and in full knowledge of the facts, which implies that it must be provided with all the information it needs, and especially the real reasons for the proposed measure, so that it can express an objective opinion. [...] While it emerges from the submissions that the general reasons for reducing the number of translators had been brought to the attention of the Staff Committee, it has not been established that the latter had been given the specific reasons for suppressing the complainant's post, rather than that of another official of the same grade and in the same Directorate, prior to delivering its opinion. [...] In the Tribunal's view, this lack of precise information concerning the specific reason for the decision to suppress the complainant's post in particular and to terminate his appointment invalidated the consultation provided for in [the applicable provisions], which is tantamount to saying that no consultation took place."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Regulation 12(a), Staff Rule 12.1(a) and Staff Circular No. 142

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; advisory body; advisory opinion; binding character; condition; consequence; decision; due process; duty to inform; executive head; flaw; grade; grounds; independence; lack of evidence; official; organisation's duties; post held by the complainant; provision; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;



  • Judgment 2352


    97th Session, 2004
    World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 4-5

    Extract:

    The complainant's post was abolished and his appointment terminated. "It is clear from the [applicable] provisions that [...] the Staff Committee had to be consulted before the decision was taken to terminate the complainant's appointment. The purpose of consulting an advisory body, prior to terminating an official's appointment, is to allow that body to ensure that all the conditions for taking such a step are met, with a view to submitting a recommendation to the executive head. The Tribunal takes the view that it is established, by the evidence [...], that the Staff Committee was indeed consulted regarding the suppression of the [complainant's] post [...]. However, it considers that the Committee was not formally consulted with regard to the intention to terminate the complainant's appointment. [...] As the impugned decision was taken in breach of the applicable rules, it must be held unlawful and the Tribunal need not rule on the complainant's other pleas."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Regulation 12(a), Staff Rule 12.1(a) and Staff Circular No. 142

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; advisory body; advisory opinion; breach; condition; consequence; decision; due process; executive head; flaw; formal requirements; organisation's duties; post held by the complainant; provision; purpose; recommendation; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;



  • Judgment 2282


    96th Session, 2004
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The integrity of the internal appellate process is of fundamental importance to the proper functioning of the international civil service. Like the process before the Tribunal itself, it must be free of any taint of fraud or abuse of power. If mere delay in the completion of an internal appeal is enough to vitiate the process (see Judgments 2072 and 2197), how much more will that be the case where the process is corrupted at its very source by an attempt to keep staff members from exercising their legal rights. The Tribunal asserts unhesitatingly that intimidation or threats of reprisal in such circumstances will be severely sanctioned. Indeed, there is a positive obligation on the part of the administration of every international organisation to assist staff in the exercise of their recourse and to place no obstacle in their way."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2072, 2197

    Keywords:

    abuse of power; delay; due process; hidden disciplinary measure; internal appeal; internal appeals body; lack of consent; misuse of authority; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; right; submissions;



  • Judgment 2261


    95th Session, 2003
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15-16

    Extract:

    The complainant challenges a disciplinary measure of dismissal for misconduct based on the following three charges: (1) external commercial activities and misrepresentation, (2) disloyalty, and (3) insubordination. In the challenged decision, the Director-General refused to follow the Appeals Committee's recommendation to the effect that the three charges be dismissed and confirmed the dismissal, dealing in detail with the first charge. Although the Tribunal acknowledges that the evidence justifies the Director-General's position, it sets aside the impugned decision because "the Director-General entirely failed to give any reason whatsoever for disagreeing with the Committee's recommendations respecting the second and third charges". The Tribunal adds that "it is not for [...] itself [to] examine the evidence to find justification for the unmotivated decision of the Director-General. [...] Nor should it condone the organization's failure to bring the internal appeal process to a timely and proper conclusion effectively depriving the complainant of both his remedy and his employment for over three years. Accordingly, it will quash the penalty on the first charge only and refer the matter back to the Director-General for a new decision on the penalty after giving the complainant full opportunity to make representations."

    Keywords:

    concurrent employment; conduct; decision; disciplinary measure; due process; duty to substantiate decision; executive head; fitness for international civil service; insubordination; internal appeal; internal appeals body; misconduct; organisation's duties; refusal; report; right of appeal; right to reply; separation from service; termination of employment; time limit;



  • Judgment 2259


    95th Session, 2003
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    Compliance with the rules of procedure is among the guarantees offered to international civil servants. There is nothing to suggest that the omission of a formality has no adverse effects on the situation of the staff members concerned. In the present case, a written proposal by the Director of the Administration Division would have been particularly necessary for consideration of the complainant's case. His plea based on the breach of Administrative Directive No. 20 (Rev.2) therefore succeeds.

    Keywords:

    contract; due process; effect; non-renewal of contract; omission; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; safeguard; separation from service;



  • Judgment 2254


    95th Session, 2003
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "According to firm precedent, before deciding a disciplinary sanction, an organisation should inform the person concerned that disciplinary proceedings have been initiated and should allow him ample opportunity to take part in adversarial proceedings, in the course of which he is given the opportunity to express his point of view, put forward evidence and participate in the processing of the evidence submitted in support of the charges against him. ... Failing a valid waiver on the part of the complainant of the adversarial proceedings provided for in the staff rules, the Director-General incorrectly based his decision on information that was not gathered in the context of adversarial proceedings guaranteeing the complainant's right to be heard. Since the complainant was not given the opportunity to put forward a proper defence, this fundamental flaw must cause the impugned decision to be set aside."

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; appraisal of evidence; case law; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; disclosure of evidence; due process; evidence; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; right to reply; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2090


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The organisation asserts that "Article 1010.1 allows it to terminate an appointment by giving one month's notice per year of service [...] The Tribunal observes that [...] 1010.1 may not be interpreted as authorising [the organisation] to terminate [fixed- term] contracts arbitrarily. Decisions of this kind must be based on unsatisfactory performance, or the interests of the service. Furthermore, there must be no breach of adversarial procedure nor any error of fact or of law, nor abuse of authority, nor obvious misappraisal of the facts."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1010.1 OF THE IFRC STAFF REGULATIONS

    Keywords:

    abuse of power; adversarial proceedings; bias; contract; due process; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; grounds; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; notice; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; provision; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;



  • Judgment 2083


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 8-9

    Extract:

    The complainant suffered from retinal detachments and a detachment of the vitreous. The organization recognised her eye condition as service incurred. In "September 1998 [...] the [organization] decide[d] to stop reimbursing the bills [she submitted] on [the] grounds [...] that curing her retinal detachments was no longer the object of the treatment. However, it did not show that the service-incurred injuries were not a "direct and principal" cause of the treatment [... ] The Tribunal takes the view that although, as the organization says, the decision to stop reimbursing the bills was at the discretion of the Director-General, it could not be taken without an independent expert medical opinion obtained through a process which provides all the safeguards of transparency and impartiality." The case is therefore sent back to the organization.

    Keywords:

    consequence; decision; discretion; due process; executive head; expert inquiry; grounds; illness; independence; lack of evidence; medical expenses; medical opinion; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; professional accident; refund; refusal; safeguard; service-incurred;



  • 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 2051


    91st Session, 2001
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    The complainant had applied for another post within the organization. While he was on leave in order to prepare his daughter's wedding, he was invited by telephone to attend an interview within two days. The complainant having stated he would not be able to attend the interview in that timeframe, his name was deleted from the list of candidates taken into consideration by the Selection Committee. "The failure to give reasonable notice to the complainant to attend an interview by refusing to take into account the family circumstances of the complainant at the time, followed by the elimination of the complainant from consideration when he could not attend, constitutes [a] flaw in the procedure adopted by the administration in respect of the selection for this post."

    Keywords:

    candidate; competition; due process; flaw; notice; post; refusal; selection board;

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


 
Last updated: 15.12.2021 ^ top