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

Appointment (293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 661, 660, 686,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Appointment
Total judgments found: 180

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



  • Judgment 3503


    120th Session, 2015
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the lawfulness of the appointment of two staff members to grade G-6 posts.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; right of appeal; vacancy;



  • Judgment 3494


    120th Session, 2015
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of her candidature for a position in Eurocontrol.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; competence; complaint allowed; decision quashed; delegated authority;



  • Judgment 3412


    119th Session, 2015
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges an appointment to a position for which he had applied, claiming discrimination.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; selection board;



  • Judgment 3381


    118th Session, 2014
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complaint was summarily dismissed on the ground that the complainant was not an official for the purpose of Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "As there was no meeting of minds between the parties concerning an appointment and the complainant did not become a staff member of IOM and, therefore, not an official for the purpose of Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute, the complaint is clearly irreceivable."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute

    Keywords:

    appointment; non official; official; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; status of complainant; summary procedure;



  • Judgment 3370


    118th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who performed duties at a higher level than his grade, impugns the decision not to grant him a promotion and acting allowance, and partially succeeds on the basis that the Organisation breached its duty of care.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; special post allowance;



  • Judgment 3308


    117th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, acting as a member of the Staff Committee, impugns the Administrative Council’s decision modifying the power of the appointing authority to adopt a new recruitment procedure for Principal Directors.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment;



  • Judgment 3288


    116th Session, 2014
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges a recruitment process.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal is of the opinion that, following the guidelines set out in Judgment 2959, the present complaint is unfounded. As Regulation 4.3 uses the term “normally”, the Tribunal finds that the Regulations governing the selection of staff members will be followed as written unless there is an exceptional situation in which it is not practicable to do so for objective reasons. Unlike the situation leading to Judgment 2959, the present complaint stems from a direct appointment that indeed can be considered as having occurred based on the “impracticability” of following the usual competitive selection process."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2959

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; interpretation; post; provision; written rule;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; complaint dismissed;



  • 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 3206


    115th Session, 2013
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complaint, which aims at the cancellation of a contested appointment, is allowed.

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The complainant challenges the decision to appoint a colleague to a grade D-2 position through a direct recruitment procedure. The Tribunal finds that there was no valid reason to apply such a procedure. “The Director General was therefore right to conclude […] that [the] appointment […] was unlawful. However, he was mistaken in believing that this did not oblige him to withdraw that appointment. Since this unlawful decision was the subject of an internal appeal validly filed by another staff member who had cause of action, the Director General had no option but to withdraw it. [T]he fact that [the colleague in question] had left the Organization’s service in the meantime did not alter that duty […].”

    Keywords:

    appointment; cause of action; competition; flaw; internal appeal; selection procedure;

    Consideration 20

    Extract:

    “[T]he complainant has no cause of action in seeking the repayment of [the] emoluments [paid to the colleague whose appointment he challenges] or calling into question her pension rights, as these measures would have no bearing on his own situation (see, for example, Judgment 2281, under 4(a) and (b)).”

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2281

    Keywords:

    appointment; cause of action; lack of injury; locus standi; pension entitlements;



  • Judgment 3191


    114th Session, 2013
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants successfully challenge a recruitment procedure which they considered as flawed.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The EPO’s position grounded on a distinction between an appointment and a promotion is fundamentally flawed. An appointment is simply the assignment of an individual to a particular position or post. A promotion is the assignment of an individual to a higher position or rank. The fact that a so called appointment process is used to make a selection or that the assignment is called an appointment does not exclude the fact that it may also be a promotion by virtue of the fact that it also involves the attainment of a higher position or rank or, in this context, grade."

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; decision quashed; executive head; flaw; promotion; promotion board; selection board; vacancy; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 3186


    114th Session, 2013
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select her to several positions for which she had applied.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3185, 3187

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; selection procedure; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 3182


    114th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the decision not to appoint her to a position for which she applied, although she ranked first in the technical evaluation.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; flaw; mistaken conclusion; recommendation; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3176


    114th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the appointment by direct selection of a staff member.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3175

    Keywords:

    appointment; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3157


    114th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the lawfulness of the selection process for a post for which he had unsuccessfully applied.

    Considerations 9 and 11

    Extract:

    "[H]aving regard to the submissions [...], the Tribunal notes that the complainant was excluded from the technical evaluation on the grounds that he did not possess all the required qualifications, but that the [three] candidates shortlisted [...] did not possess them either. [...] [T]he complainant received unequal treatment when the shortlist was established. As the selection process is tainted with a flaw, the impugned decision must be set aside and the disputed appointment must be cancelled [...]. The Organization must shield the successful candidate from any injury that might result from the cancellation of his appointment, which he accepted in good faith."

    Keywords:

    appointment; breach; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; complaint allowed; consequence; criteria; decision quashed; degree; equal treatment; good faith; grounds; internal competition; lack of injury; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; rejected permanently;



  • Judgment 3090


    112th Session, 2012
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal may rule on any employment relationship arising between an organisation and its staff, whether under the terms of a contract or under Staff Regulations. If a decision to appoint an employee, or to terminate his or her employment, is challenged on the grounds that it affects the rights of the person concerned which the Tribunal is competent to safeguard, the Tribunal must rule on the lawfulness of the disputed decision. It is immaterial whether the employee in question was recruited under a contract and whether that contract was for a fixed term. (See Judgment 1272, under 9.)"

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1272

    Keywords:

    appointment; competence of tribunal; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; duration of appointment; official; right; safeguard; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3074


    112th Session, 2012
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15 and 16

    Extract:

    "[I]nternational organisations' staff members do not have a right to have all the conditions of employment laid down in the provisions of the staff rules and regulations in force at the time of their recruitment applied to them throughout their career.
    [M]ost of those conditions [can] be altered during [their] employment as a result of amendments to those provisions. Of course the position is different if, having regard to the nature and importance of the provision in question, the complainant has an acquired right to its continued application. However, according to the case law established in Judgment 61, clarified in Judgment 832 and confirmed in Judgment 986, the amendment of a provision governing an official's situation to his or her detriment constitutes a breach of an acquired right only when such an amendment adversely affects the balance of contractual obligations, or alters fundamental terms of employment in consideration of which the official accepted an appointment, or which subsequently induced him or her to stay on. In order for there to be a breach of an acquired right, the amendment to the applicable text must therefore relate to a fundamental and essential term of employment within the meaning of Judgment 832 (in this connection see also Judgments 2089, 2682, 2696 or 2986). The conditions for the payment of removal expenses, in particular a limit on the volume of household goods which may be shipped at the Organization's expense, plainly do not have this character [...]."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 61, 832, 986, 2089, 2682, 2696, 2986

    Keywords:

    acquired right; amendment to the rules; applicable law; appointment; breach; career; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; contract; date; exception; limits; official; personal effects; provision; removal expenses; right; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 3073


    112th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "According to the case law, an international organisation which decides to hold a competition in order to fill a post cannot select a candidate who does not satisfy one of the required qualifications specified in the vacancy notice. Such conduct, which is tantamount to modifying the criteria for appointment to the post during the selection process, incurs the Tribunal's censure on two counts. Firstly, it violates the principle of patere legem quam ipse fecisti, which forbids the Administration to ignore the rules it has itself defined. In this respect, a modification of the applicable criteria during the selection procedure more generally undermines the requirements of mutual trust and fairness which international organisations have a duty to observe in their relations with their staff. Secondly, the appointment body's alteration, after the procedure had begun, of the qualifications which were initially required in order to obtain the post, introduces a serious flaw into the selection process with respect to the principle of equal opportunity among candidates. Irrespective of the reasons for such action, it inevitably erodes the safeguards of objectivity and transparency which must be provided in order to comply with this essential principle, breach of which vitiates any appointment based on a competition. (See Judgments 1158, 1646, 2584 and 2712.)"

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1158, 1646, 2584, 2712

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; appointment; breach; candidate; competition; complaint allowed; condition; criteria; decision quashed; equal treatment; equity; flaw; grounds; organisation's duties; patere legem; safeguard; vacancy notice; working relations; written rule;



  • Judgment 3032


    111th Session, 2011
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 22

    Extract:

    "[W]hen an international organisation wants to fill a post by competition, it must comply with the material rules and the general precepts of the case law (see, for example, Judgment 2163 [...], under 3)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2163

    Keywords:

    appointment; case law; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; consequence; decision; due process; general principle; organisation's duties; provision; staff regulations and rules; written rule;



  • Judgment 3026


    111th Session, 2011
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    Failure on the part of the Organisation to give the complainant a fair opportunity to demonstrate improvement prior to deciding not to renew his fixed-term contract for unsatisfactory performance.
    "It must be assumed that until 2006 the complainant's work was satisfactory as his contract was renewed from time to time, albeit that he was not subject to performance appraisal during the period he was employed on temporary assistance contracts."

    Keywords:

    appointment; complainant; contract; performance report; period; presumption; satisfactory service; short-term; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3005


    111th Session, 2011
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    Rejection of a request for conversion of a fixed-term appointment to a permanent one.
    "In Judgment 1349, under 11, the Tribunal noted the wide discretion an organisation enjoys in relation to the decision to convert a fixed-term appointment to a permanent one. Given the highly discretionary nature of the decision, it is subject to limited review and will only be set aside 'if it is taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it is based on a mistake of fact or of law, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the facts, or if there was an abuse of authority' (see Judgment 2694, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1349, 2694

    Keywords:

    appointment; contract; decision; discretion; fixed-term; judicial review; permanent appointment;

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


 
Last updated: 02.07.2020 ^ top