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

Good faith (193,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Good faith
Total judgments found: 184

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



  • Judgment 2337


    97th Session, 2004
    European Organization for Nuclear Research
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The case law cited [by the complainant] refers to the situation of a staff member who, failing any indication to the contrary, can rely on the continuation of his contractual relations (either not terminated or renewed), since according to the rules of good faith the Organization should warn the staff member if it considers his performance unsatisfactory in order to give him a chance to improve. The situation is different if an organisation [...] restricts the number of fixed term contracts a staff member may be given and lays down specific conditions for the award of an indefinite contract. In this case, the staff member cannot sit back and wait for his contract to be turned into an indefinite contract, since he will be expected to meet stricter requirements. Of course, the Organization is not on that account relieved of its duty of care towards the staff member, and, in accordance with the rules of good faith, it must warn him either if it is convinced that he is simply incapable of performing the duties attached to an indefinite contract, or if it believes that, in order to perform them the staff member must improve the quality of his work still further. This is an obligation the Organization must fulfil particularly in the context of periodic performance appraisals."

    Keywords:

    case law; condition; contract; duty to inform; fixed-term; good faith; legitimate expectation; organisation's duties; performance report; permanent appointment; satisfactory service; successive contracts; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 2325


    97th Session, 2004
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "[T]he delay of some 15 months between the selection of the successful candidate and the notification to the complainant thereof was unreasonably long. The Agency's argument to the effect that the complainant was implicitly aware of his non-selection because he knew that someone else had been placed on the post is not acceptable. It had the duty to inform the complainant in a timely manner of his non-appointment. The Agency has failed in its obligation to deal with the complainant in good faith and, while such failure can in no way affect the validity of the selection process itself, it does entitle the complainant to a nominal award of moral damages which the Tribunal fixes at 500 euros."

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; candidate; competition; duty to inform; good faith; moral injury; reasonable time; time limit;



  • Judgment 2304


    96th Session, 2004
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    In its Judgment 2246, the Tribunal ordered the Organization to provide the complainant within 30 days of notification of the judgment with part of the documents supplied to the Tribunal pursuant to Judgment 2192. The complainant points out that the Organization failed to do so within the time limit. "The Tribunal finds that the delay in supplying the documents cannot be attributed solely to the Organization. Prior to the expiry of the prescribed time limit, the latter [...] had written to the complainant asking him to undertake not to divulge the requested documents to third parties. Rather than reply to that letter, the complainant filed an application for execution with the Tribunal, whereas he ought to have shown good faith by replying to the defendant's request."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2192, 2246

    Keywords:

    application for execution; communication to third party; confidential evidence; date of notification; delay; direct appeal to tribunal; execution of judgment; good faith; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; liability; organisation; request by a party; staff member's duties; time limit;



  • Judgment 2293


    96th Session, 2004
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 11-12

    Extract:

    "While there is no doubt whatever that the Organisation owes a duty of good faith to its staff - '[r]elations between an organisation and its staff must be governed by good faith' (see Judgment 2116) - bad faith must be proved and is never presumed. [...] Although to act in bad faith is always to mismanage, the reverse is not the case and honest mistakes or even sheer stupidity will not, without more, be enough. Bad faith requires an element of malice, ill will, improper motive, fraud or similar dishonest purpose."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2116

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; decision; evidence; good faith; lack of evidence; misconduct; organisation's duties; staff member's duties; working relations;



  • Judgment 2290


    96th Session, 2004
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "In case of doubt [on the meaning which may reasonably be given to the clause of a contract], it is accepted that, in accordance with the principle of good faith, ambiguous clauses should be interpreted to the detriment of the party which drafted the contract."

    Keywords:

    benefit of doubt; contract; good faith; interpretation; law of contract; provision; written rule;



  • Judgment 2223


    95th Session, 2003
    European Molecular Biology Laboratory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The fact that the Director-General [did not initiate] the appeal procedure invalidates the defendant's argument that internal remedies were not exhausted, although they should have been as required by article vii of the Tribunal's Statute. While it is regrettable that the case was never brought before the Joint Advisory Appeals Board, this does not prevent the Tribunal from ruling on the merits of the complaint, which has been filed within the applicable rules."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VII OF THE STATUTE

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; consequence; executive head; formal requirements; good faith; iloat statute; internal appeal; internal appeals body; internal remedies exhausted; organisation; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; refusal; staff member's duties;



  • Judgment 2210


    94th Session, 2003
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "Where a reserve recruitment list is resorted to, the vacant post is filled without applying the competition procedure provided for in the above-mentioned provisions. Staff members must be given the possibility of entering competitions on the basis of which reserve lists for filling 'similar' posts are to be established. That possibility is denied them if they do not know what is meant by 'similar' posts. [...] The broader the definition of 'similar', the greater the risk of such occurrences. The requirements of equal treatment, objectivity and transparency in appointment procedures place the [organisation] under an obligation to provide a clear and precise definition of the concept of a 'similar' post. [...] It is the responsibility of the [organisation] to specify, in notices of competition, the nature of the posts which can be considered to be 'similar' for the purposes of any subsequent use of a reserve list."

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; competition; definition; equal treatment; good faith; organisation's duties; right; vacancy; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2163


    93rd Session, 2002
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "An appointment by an international organisation is a discretionary decision. Being subject to only limited review, it may be set aside only if it was taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it was based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some material fact was overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if a clearly wrong conclusion was drawn from the evidence. The Tribunal will, in cases like the present, exercise its power of review with special caution, its function being not to judge the candidates on merit but to allow the organisation full responsibility for its choice. [...] Nevertheless, anyone who applies for a post to be filled by some process of selection is entitled to have his application considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition. That is a right that every applicant must enjoy, whatever his hopes of success may be (see Judgments 1077 [...], 1497 [...] and 1549 [...])."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1077, 1497, 1549

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; case law; competition; decision; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; equal treatment; flaw; formal flaw; good faith; international civil service principles; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; right;



  • Judgment 2152


    93rd Session, 2002
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 11 and 14

    Extract:

    "The requirement of good faith dealings is a two-way street. While staff members are under no obligation to assist the administration in any actions the latter may wish to take against them, they do have a duty not to so conduct themselves as to deliberately frustrate normal dealings with their employer. The latter is entitled to assume that the employees will receive and accept written communications sent to them in the normal course of affairs. [...] The fact that the complainant, by his own conduct, only took possession of the letter and became aware of his dismissal [the day after the expiry of his probation] cannot prevent the [Organisation] from having given him valid notice of dismissal."

    Keywords:

    date of notification; good faith; notice; probationary period; separation from service; staff member's duties; termination of employment;



  • Judgment 2116


    92nd Session, 2002
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "Relations between an organisation and its staff must be governed by good faith. Furthermore, an organisation must treat its staff with due consideration and avoid causing them undue injury. In particular, it must inform them in advance of any action that may imperil their rights or rightful interests." See the case- law cited.

    Keywords:

    case law; decision; duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's duties; staff member's interest;



  • 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;



  • Judgment 2066


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

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "When an organisation hints that it will reconsider a decision affecting a staff member, it cannot reasonably expect the latter to challenge that decision. Nor may the staff member lodge an appeal against it unless the administration expressly states that the appeal procedure will take its course despite attempts to settle the case. In such instances, the rule that confirmation of an earlier decision sets off no new time limit for appeal does not apply."

    Keywords:

    case law; collective bargaining; confirmatory decision; decision; enforcement; exception; express decision; good faith; internal appeal; receivability of the complaint; staff member's duties; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • 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 2037


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

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The complainants challenge the appointment of another staff member. The Appeals Committee considered that the appeals had not been filed in time. But the complainants argue that the challenged appointment was not definitive until the offer had been signed and the conditions for appointment satisfied. "When what is challenged is a contract between an organisation and a future employee, the act which may be impugned is the contract as communicated by the organisation, irrespective of the possibilities open to the contracting parties to appeal internally such as a medical examination still to be undergone [...] legal certainty requires communications from an organisation to be reliable so that all concerned know when the time limit for an appeal starts to run. this is all the more important when the organisation is not bound to reveal the exact content of the contract. In this instance, [...] since the organisation had already notified its decision and its agreement with the future [staff member] on his terms of appointment, the signing of the contract and the prior medical examination appeared to be mere formalities. It would have been sheer pedantry to insist that they be completed and the staff so informed before the appointment of the [staff member] was announced." The time limit for an appeal had therefore started to run as soon as the personnel had been informed of the contested appointment.

    Keywords:

    appointment; cause of action; contract; date; decision; duty to inform; formal requirements; good faith; internal appeal; medical examination; offer; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 2017


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

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "An organisation must interpret the statements of a staff member in good faith and [...] as part of its duty to spare the staff member unnecessary injury, it may also be called upon to provide procedural guidance and help to put right a mistake (see Judgment 1734, [...] under 3(g))."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1734

    Keywords:

    good faith; injury; interpretation; organisation's duties; request by a party; staff member's interest; statement of intent;



  • Judgment 1934


    88th Session, 2000
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The complainant was offered an exceptional separation package on the condition that he not appeal his separation and/or its terms and conditions. He accepted the same day. "There is no evidence that these commitments - which the complainant now appears to regret - were tainted by a fraudulent attitude or pressure from the [organisation]. The complainant accepted the terms and conditions of the settlement that he made with the organisation, some of which were very favourable, and he cannot challenge them now."

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; agreed termination; good faith; terminal entitlements; termination of employment; waiver of right of appeal;



  • Judgment 1924


    88th Session, 2000
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    The complainant accepted a settlement proposal by the organization within the imposed deadline. However, four months went by and he heard nothing more on the subject so he wrote to inquire when the settlement would be effected. One month later he was informed that the organization had learned that certain costs would be higher than it had foreseen, therefore, it preferred that the dispute be decided by the Administrative Tribunal. "Efforts made for the resolution of disputes are to be encouraged and the principle of good faith requires that if an offer is accepted the other party cannot then withdraw from it. The offer [...] should, accordingly, be implemented."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; good faith; intention of parties; offer; offer withdrawn; organisation's duties; promise; settlement out of court; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 1897


    88th Session, 2000
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "As the organisation did not contest the receivability of a premature appeal [...] during the internal procedure, the principle of good faith prevents it from doing so subsequently."

    Keywords:

    good faith; internal appeal; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 1894


    88th Session, 2000
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "It is not for the complainant [...] to judge whether the information requested by [the insurance company] is necessary in order to enable it to assess her claims. That is a matter for the professional assessment of [the insurance company] and its medical adviser and the Tribunal would not interfere unless it was satisfied that the information was being sought for some abusive or improper purpose."

    Keywords:

    evidence; good faith; health insurance; illness; insurance; judicial review; limits; medical examination; medical expenses; staff member's duties; tribunal;



  • Judgment 1848


    87th Session, 1999
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant questions the right of the insurance company to which she is affiliated to contact her physicians directly to seek information. "The law is clear that [the insurance company] is entitled to any information which identifies the nature of the alleged illness and allows it to determine whether the prescribed treatment is appropriate and necessary [...] Of course the complainant is entitled to require that such information only be made available to [the insurance company's] medical adviser and be treated by the latter in confidence but she is not entitled to withhold from them any right of access whatsoever to the required medical information. Her unwillingness to allow such access goes against her duty to deal in good faith with her insurers."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1288

    Keywords:

    conduct; confidential evidence; elements; good faith; health insurance; illness; insurance; medical consultant; medical records; refusal; safeguard; staff member's duties;

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


 
Last updated: 23.11.2020 ^ top