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

Contract (292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 661, 660, 686, 309, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 648, 654, 671,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Contract
Total judgments found: 422

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 | next >

  • Judgment 4333


    131st Session, 2021
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges her effective entry on duty (EOD) date under a fixed-term appointment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; contract; decision quashed; entry on duty;



  • Judgment 4149


    128th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to abolish his post and to place him on special leave with pay until the expiry of his fixed-term appointment.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    If a member of staff is, under the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, entitled to be considered for reassignment, a bare contractual provision which limits, qualifies or removes that right has no legal effect. The Tribunal has recently said in Judgment 4018, consideration 7, that ďa clause [of a contract of employment] which, as is the case here, contravenes the staff rules and regulations is unlawful and therefore cannot apply, even if the contracting parties clearly intended it to do soĒ.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4018

    Keywords:

    contract; reassignment;



  • Judgment 4086


    127th Session, 2019
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to maintain her contested job description.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    [T]he alleged failure to provide the subject job description [did not] amount to constructive dismissal, as WIPO did not thereby breach the complainantís contract in such a way as to indicate that it would no longer have been bound by it (see, for example, Judgment 2745, under 13).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2745

    Keywords:

    constructive dismissal; contract; post description;



  • Judgment 4037


    126th Session, 2018
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the non-renewal of her temporary appointment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; contract; decision quashed; non-renewal of contract; short-term;



  • Judgment 4018


    126th Session, 2018
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision no longer to pay him an expatriation allowance.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    It is plain from the evidence in the file that the clause providing for the granting of the expatriation allowance to the complainant was deliberately included in the letter of appointment by the signatory parties and was not the result of a mere administrative error, as Eurocontrol now tries to argue.
    The complainant has produced an exchange of emails with the Head of the Engineering Division which unambiguously prove that his recruitment was preceded by negotiations precisely concerning the granting of the expatriation allowance and that the Eurocontrol Administration had agreed to grant him this benefit in order that his remuneration would remain similar to that which he had previously received in the private sector. [...]
    Similarly, Eurocontrolís argument that the complainantís letter of appointment did not explicitly refer to an agreement between the parties on this subject ďnotwithstanding the rules and regulationsĒ does not mean that no such informal agreement existed, since it is hardly likely that an organisation would wish to draw attention in a contract to the unlawful nature of one of the clauses thereof.
    In view of the foregoing, the Tribunal will not accept the Organisationís submission that the clause providing for the benefit in question was inserted into the complainantís contract solely as a result of an accidental error in applying Article 4(1) of Rule of Application No. 7. In this connection, the Organisation explains that the Administration of the Maastricht Centre wrongly believed that the complainantís services while he was placed at the disposal of Eurocontrol by private companies prior to his recruitment should be regarded as services for an international organisation within the meaning of Article 4(1), and that they were therefore not to be taken into account when determining whether he was entitled to receive the expatriation allowance. In view of the evidence on file, the Tribunal is of the opinion that, at best, the purpose of this somewhat surprising alleged misunderstanding was to contrive a reason for granting the complainant a benefit which the Organisation had purposefully decided to give him, in breach of the applicable text, in order to be able to offer him a level of remuneration which would persuade him to accept his appointment.

    Keywords:

    clerical error; contract; intention of parties;

    Considerations 7-8

    Extract:

    [A]n international organisation cannot lawfully conclude an employment contract containing a clause that is contrary to its existing staff rules and regulations. The organisation must abide by the provisions it has itself laid down and they therefore take precedence over the clauses of contracts concluded between it and its officials (see, for example, Judgments 1634, under 19, or 2097, under 10).
    It follows that a clause which [...] contravenes the staff rules and regulations is unlawful and therefore cannot apply, even if the contracting parties clearly intended it to do so. Were that not the case, an organisation could evade compliance with its staff regulations on a case-by-case basis, which would seriously undermine the legal framework to which they belong and, in particular, would breach the principle of the equal treatment of officials. [...]
    It is useful to compare this dispute with that which gave rise to Judgment 3483, in which an officialís employment contract made provision for the granting of a benefit which was not mandatory under the Staff Regulations and which the organisation concerned did not intend to pay. Although, in the latter case, the Tribunal found that the disputed contractual clause had to be applied, it did so after expressly noting in consideration 8 of that judgment that the clause had not been unlawfully included in the complainantís contract, since a provision of the organisationís rules permitted the granting of the allowance in question to staff members in the position of the official in question. In this case, on the other hand, there was no provision permitting Eurocontrol to grant the complainant an expatriation allowance.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1634, 2097, 3483

    Keywords:

    contract; precedence of rules; staff regulations and rules;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    [B]y deliberately including in the complainantís letter of appointment, albeit at his request, a clause stipulating that he would receive the expatriation allowance, although he could not lawfully claim it, Eurocontrol indisputably acted wrongly. Moreover, the subsequent decision to withdraw this benefit, which had been unlawfully granted to the complainant, who wrongly thought he was entitled to it and who had no doubt viewed it as an essential condition when he had decided to accept his appointment, caused him serious injury stemming primarily from that wrongful act.
    The complainant therefore has reason to claim, as he does subsidiarily in his complaint, that this injury should be redressed by ordering the Organisation to pay him damages.

    Keywords:

    contract; damages;



  • Judgment 4016


    126th Session, 2018
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to extend his appointment beyond the mandatory retirement age.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; contract; extension beyond retirement age; retirement;



  • Judgment 3938


    125th Session, 2018
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to confirm her appointment due to the rejection of her application for a work visa by the authorities of the country of her duty station.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; competence of tribunal; complaint dismissed; contract; host state; non official; offer withdrawn; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint;



  • Judgment 3845


    124th Session, 2017
    African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment at the end of his probationary period.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The complainant agreed quite freely to sign the new contract including the clause which he now alleges is unlawful, and it was not unjustified, to say the least, to stipulate a trial period, given that the newly agreed appointment was for a period of just over six years.

    Keywords:

    contract; probationary period;



  • Judgment 3489


    120th Session, 2015
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision that his 2010 Performance Review Report shall be redone from the beginning and that a decision regarding an amendment to his contract extension from three to five years will be contingent on the outcome of the new Report.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; contract; decision quashed; extension of contract; performance evaluation; report;



  • Judgment 3483


    120th Session, 2015
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the FAOís decision not to pay her a daily subsistence allowance during her appointment in Rome.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "[T]he trite and consistent principle [is] that a written contract or a provision therein may be revoked or amended for error or mistake where the minds of the parties meet in agreement that what is expressly provided does not reflect their real intention."

    Keywords:

    contract;

    Consideration 1

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal has often stated that the function of a court of law is to interpret and apply a contract in accordance with the real intention of the parties as expressed in the language of the contract. It is basic principle that when a term of employment is clear and unambiguous the parties are bound by that term unless there is evidence that warrants looking behind the mere wording of the text to ascertain the partiesí real intention (see, for example, Judgment 1385, under 12). The Tribunal has also stated that where any term of employment is expressed in writing, the intention of the parties is to be ascertained from the documents that are produced. A contract or term therein may be vitiated or varied if there is overwhelming evidence that the parties had a contrary intention to that which is expressed in the text (see, for example, Judgment 1634, under 21)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1385, 1634

    Keywords:

    contract; interpretation;



  • Judgment 3449


    119th Session, 2015
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal cancelled the disputed competitions because the ILO rendered the recruitments unlawful.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "[T]he complainant also acted in his capacity as Chairperson of the Staff Union Committee of the Office. According to the case law, members of a staff committee may bring a complaint to preserve common rights and interests, these being understood to mean enforceable legal rights and interests derived from terms of appointment or under Staff Regulations which have not necessarily been breached in respect of the member of the staff committee who files a complaint with the Tribunal.
    In order for a complaint submitted on behalf of a staff committee to be receivable, it must allege a breach of guarantees which an organisation is legally bound to provide to staff who are connected to it by an employment contract or who have the status of officials. This condition is a sine qua non for the Tribunalís jurisdiction (see Judgment 3342, under 10, and the case law cited therein)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3342

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; contract; locus standi; staff representative;



  • Judgment 3362


    118th Session, 2014
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to renew his short-term contract and not to advertise his post.

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    "[I]t is clear from the actual wording of Rule 9.E a) of the Staff Rules applicable to staff members engaged for conferences and other short-term service, expressly reproduced in that contract, and from the consistent case law of the Tribunal, that a short term contract ordinarily ends automatically, without prior notice, on the expiration date of the period for which it was concluded. It is true that, according to the case law, an international organisation is nevertheless obliged to give a reasonable period of prior notice where a staff member has been employed continuously under such contracts for a period of time exceeding that which corresponds to a purely temporary assignment (see Judgments 2104, under 6, and 2531, under 9)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2104, 2351

    Keywords:

    contract; non-renewal of contract; notice; short-term;



  • Judgment 3282


    116th Session, 2014
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision not to renew his contract based on an "overall assessment" that his performance was below the acceptable level.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    breach; compensation; complaint allowed; contract; decision quashed; duty of care; flaw; material injury; moral injury; non-renewal of contract;



  • Judgment 3262


    116th Session, 2014
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who applied for the position of Legal Advisor, was offered the post, but at a grade lower than that at which it was advertised.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; candidate; compensation; contract; grade; moral injury; offer; offer withdrawn; post; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3257


    116th Session, 2014
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision to offer him a one-year extension of his fixed-term contract rather than the two-year extensions he had previously received.

    Considerations 18 and 19

    Extract:

    "[T]he Commission breached its own rules regarding the procedure by which the performance appraisal report, which contained the recommendation for the extension of the contract, was to be communicated to the Personnel Division. Paragraph 3.2 of Administrative Directive No. 20 (Rev.2) requires the proposal for the extension of the contract to be submitted to the Personnel Division with a justification of the recommendation that was stated in the proposal. The performance appraisal report was also to be submitted with them.
    There are good reasons for this provision. The proposal containing the recommendation, the justification of the recommendation and the performance appraisal report, submitted together, is intended to provide a complete picture of the performance of a staff member. This in turn is to inform a decision which that Division, the PAP or the Executive Secretary may have been required to make."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Paragraph 3.2 of Administrative Directive No. 20 (Rev.2)

    Keywords:

    contract; enforcement; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; performance report; staff regulations and rules;

    Considerations 11 and 12

    Extract:

    "These facts were significant as they highlight the need for reasons in this case because these circumstances impacted the complainantís ability to assess whether he should have accepted the offer of the one-year extension of his contract and whether he should challenge the decision.
    It is also significant that the complainant was reminded of the deadline [...], when he had not yet received the explanation. Additionally, it was in the letter [...], which included the explanation, that the Executive Secretary informed the complainant that his contract would expire [...] because he had failed to accept the offer of extension. The Tribunal therefore finds that the decision to offer the one-year extension to the complainant was flawed by the failure of the Administration to provide a timely explanation for that decision."

    Keywords:

    case law; contract; decision; duration of appointment; extension of contract; flaw; notice; offer; termination of employment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed; contract; decision quashed; discretion; extension of contract; fixed-term; offer; performance report; procedural flaw; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3252


    116th Session, 2014
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to extend her fixed-term contract for a period of one year instead of three years on the basis of an adverse evaluation report.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "There is a general principle applied by this Tribunal that an organisation cannot base an adverse decision on a staff memberís unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance (see Judgment 2414, consideration 24)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414

    Keywords:

    contract; decision; fixed-term; grounds; patere legem; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3166


    114th Session, 2013
    International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant alleges that he suffered harassment, mobbing and defamation on the part of his supervisors.

    Considerations 18 and 19

    Extract:

    "[T]he JAC made a finding of procedural irregularities in relation to the consideration of the complainantís grievances. It recognised, as this Tribunal has stated, that an organisation has a duty to its staff members to investigate claims of harassment (see Judgment 3071). This conclusion would have warranted consideration of a remedy. However, the JAC adopted the approach, accepted by the Secretary General, that the Federation had ďacted in the [complainantís] favourĒ because the contract of [the alleged harasser], amongst others, had not been renewed.
    The non-renewal of [that person]ís contract did not involve a vindication of the complainantís rights. Ordinarily, the mechanism for addressing the violation of a personís rights is to award compensation to the aggrieved person or to make an order restoring the person to the position he or she would have been in but for the violation. The nonrenewal of the contract of a person who had violated a complainantís rights may, of course, provide moral comfort to the complainant. However, the task of the Secretary General is to determine a response in relation to a grievance formally raised and established which remedies the effect of the proven violation of rights. The non-renewal of a contract, such as occurred in the present case, does not serve this purpose."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3071

    Keywords:

    advisory body; claim; compensation; contract; decision; executive head; harassment; injury; material injury; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; procedural flaw;



  • Judgment 3159


    114th Session, 2013
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision to abolish his post.

    Considerations 9, 19 and 20

    Extract:

    "The terms of Staff Rule 1050.2 are clear. They impose a duty on the Organization in specified circumstances. The duty is to use reasonable efforts to reassign a staff member whose post is being abolished. The specified circumstances are, as to a staff member on a fixed-term appointment, that the staff member has served ďfor a continuous and uninterrupted period of five years or moreĒ. The expression ďcontinuous and uninterruptedĒ fairly emphatically focuses attention on service of a particular character. There is no basis in the language of the Staff Rule to treat its operation as ambulatory in the sense that a person who has been on a fixed-term appointment but has not served in that capacity for a continuous and uninterrupted period of at least five years is nonetheless a person to whom the Organization, by operation of the Rule, is under a duty to make reasonable efforts to reassign. [...] However, a staff rule cast in terms of Staff Rule 1050.2 does not preclude the possibility that the Organization is under a duty requiring proactive conduct in circumstances not comprehended by the Rule itself. WHO does not put in issue that there is a general duty of loyalty, as the complainant contends. What might be required of an organisation in broadly similar circumstances was considered by the Tribunal in Judgment 2902. [...] The same reasoning can be applied in the present case. The complainant and WHO found it mutually acceptable, and with benefits accruing to both, for the complainant to be employed on a series of short-term appointments for much of the complainantís employment. But the complainant nonetheless had worked, in a real and practical sense, for over a decade and a half in the service of the Organization. In those circumstances, WHO was obliged to explore with the complainant other employment options prior to his separation."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Rule 1050.2
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; contract; duration of appointment; enforcement; fixed-term; general principle; intention of parties; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reassignment; short-term; staff regulations and rules; successive contracts;



  • Judgment 3115


    113th Session, 2012
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The complainant alleges that senior officials misappropriated funds to the detriment of poor countries. "However, in raising that allegation before the Tribunal, she overlooks the fact that the competence of the Tribunal is clearly and exhaustively defined in Article II of its Statute, from which it follows that the Tribunal cannot interfere either with the policies of the international organisations which have recognised its competence, or with the workings of their administrations, unless a violation of the rights of a staff member is in issue. International civil servants seeking to file a complaint with the Tribunal must show that the decisions they are challenging are such as to affect personal interests of theirs which are protected by the rights and safeguards deriving from the applicable Staff Regulations and Rules, or from the terms of their appointments."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute

    Keywords:

    breach; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; contract; exception; iloat statute; official; organisation's reputation; provision; right; safeguard; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; supervisor; vested competence; written rule;



  • Judgment 3112


    113th Session, 2012
    International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant did not sign the offer of appointment within the time limit prescribed by the organisation.
    "As the complainant herself acknowledged, there were still unresolved issues that she wished to have settled before entering into a contract. Accordingly, it cannot be said that at that time there was any contractual relationship between the parties, let alone an employment relationship. As there was no employment relationship, the complainant was not an official of the organisation. It follows that the Tribunal is not competent to hear the complaint and that, therefore, it must be dismissed."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; competence of tribunal; complaint; contract; non official; offer; offer withdrawn; official; refusal; status of complainant; terms of appointment; time limit;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 | next >


 
Last updated: 28.09.2021 ^ top