Reinstatement (315,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Reinstatement
Total judgments found: 173
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 4360
131st Session, 2021
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges her summary dismissal for serious misconduct.
Consideration 20
Extract:
Ordinarily, when a decision to dismiss a staff member is legally flawed, it is set aside and the Tribunal considers, in appropriate circumstances, whether the complainant should be reinstated and the financial consequences on the complainant of the unlawful decision.
Keywords:
decision quashed; reinstatement; termination of employment;
Judgment 4337
131st Session, 2021
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of her requests for reinstatement.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
cause of action; complaint dismissed; former official; reinstatement;
Consideration 7
Extract:
[A]n official who resigns does not have the right to be later reinstated.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4310
130th Session, 2020
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to apply the sanction of summary dismissal to him.
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant seeks reinstatement at the ILO. As a rule, an official dismissed on disciplinary grounds whose dismissal is set aside is entitled to be reinstated. However, the Tribunal may refuse to make such an order if reinstatement is no longer possible or if it is inappropriate. According to the Tribunal’s case law, reinstatement is inadvisable when an employer has valid reasons for losing confidence in an employee (see, in particular, Judgments 1238, under 4, and 3364, under 27) [...].
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1238, 3364
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; reinstatement; termination of employment;
Judgment 4254
129th Session, 2020
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his appointment beyond the statutory retirement age.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant asks the Tribunal to order the “extension of [his] contract retroactively from the date on which [he] left the International Labour Office [...] on 31 January 2016 up to the age of 65 years with the same status that [he] had before leaving the Office”. However, that period having expired by the date of this judgment, the Tribunal cannot, in any event, order that the complainant be reinstated as he requests.
Keywords:
reinstatement; retirement age;
Judgment 4240
129th Session, 2020
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reassign her to the post of Senior Advisor on Innovative Strategic Information, Strategic Information and Evaluation Department.
Consideration 17
Extract:
[The complainant's] request for an order to reinstate her to her previous post [...] will be rejected as it has been overtaken by subsequent events.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4231
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term appointment and to place him on special leave with pay until his contract expired.
Consideration 14
Extract:
As the complainant has not shown that the non-renewal of his contract was unlawful, the question of reinstatement does not arise.
Keywords:
non-renewal of contract; reinstatement;
Judgment 4229
129th Session, 2020
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former staff member of the World Food Programme, challenges the decision to maintain the decision not to renew his contract, and to award him material and moral damages instead of reinstatement.
Consideration 4
Extract:
In the Tribunal’s view, it was mistaken for the impugned decision to rely on the fact that the complainant’s 2011 and 2012 PACE appraisal reports gave him an “unsatisfactory” overall rating, and were not revised to satisfactory, as well as concerns that were stated in the complainant’s probationary appraisal (which actually gave a satisfactory rating), as bases for finding that his reinstatement was not warranted. Accordingly, the impugned decision will be set aside to the extent that it denied reinstatement. However, inasmuch as the complainant held a fixed-term appointment that expired on 3 June 2013 rather than a continuing appointment, and given the time that has passed, the Tribunal considers that it is not appropriate to order his reinstatement (see, for example, Judgment 4063, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4063
Keywords:
fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; performance report; reinstatement;
Judgment 4215
129th Session, 2020
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to confirm his appointment at the end of his probation period.
Consideration 20
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal will not grant the complainant’s request for an order to reinstate him at OTIF. It considers that, particularly in view of the time that has passed since the complainant left the Organisation and the real difficulties that such a reinstatement would inevitably create, such an order is not advisable in this case.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4177
128th Session, 2019
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term appointment for health reasons.
Consideration 18
Extract:
The Tribunal finds that reinstatement would be impracticable considering the administrative difficulties that would arise from convening a new Medical Board and completing the assessment procedure for the complainant’s fitness to work; the fact that the complainant was on a one-year fixed-term appointment from 2 January 2017; the time that has elapsed since the termination of her appointment and the wellbeing of the complainant who would have to endure the ongoing insecurity of the re-evaluation process for assessing her health situation. Therefore, the Tribunal finds it appropriate not to order reinstatement but it will award the complainant material damages for the loss of a valuable opportunity to continue her work with the Organization.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4170
128th Session, 2019
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges her performance reports for the 2010-2011 biennium and the decisions to defer her within-grade salary increment until 1 February 2012, to withhold that increment on that date and to not renew her fixed-term appointment for unsatisfactory service.
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant asks to be reinstated at UNESCO. However, it should be noted that the complainant was not dismissed. The complainant’s appointment was not terminated; it was not renewed on its expiry. The Tribunal considers that in the present case, it is not appropriate to order the complainant’s reinstatement, in view of the time that has passed, the particular circumstances of the case, and the fact that, as has just been stated, the complainant did not hold an indeterminate appointment (see, for example, Judgments 2763, consideration 27, 3299, consideration 28, and 4009, consideration 16).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2763, 3299, 4009
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4139
128th Session, 2019
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term contract as a result of her post having been abolished.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant, who does not ask to be reinstated at the Global Fund, seeks compensation for material and moral injury resulting from the abolition of her post and the subsequent termination of her contract.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4097
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decisions to end her participation in the reassignment process and to terminate her fixed-term appointment further to the abolition of her post.
Consideration 17
Extract:
The complainant seeks reinstatement. Having regard to the fact that the complainant’s position was lawfully abolished, the effluxion of time and the absence of the complainant pointing to a position that, demonstrably, she could occupy, reinstatement is inappropriate.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4092
127th Session, 2019
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant asks the Tribunal to order WHO to comply with the obligations imposed on it by Judgment 3871 and, in particular, to reinstate him with all legal consequences.
Consideration 8
Extract:
[T]he reinstatement with all legal consequences referred to in Judgment 3871 implies in the present case that WHO must pay the complainant the equivalent of the salary and benefits of all kinds which he would have received if the execution of his contract had continued under normal conditions during this period, less the amounts already awarded to him pursuant to the Director-General’s decision of 24 December 2014 (except those awarded as compensation for the undue length of the internal appeal proceedings and as costs relating to those proceedings) and any earnings received from other sources during that period. WHO must also ensure that the complainant’s pension rights and his affiliation to the provident or social security schemes are maintained for the same period.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3871
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3871
Keywords:
application for execution; complaint allowed; reinstatement;
Consideration 7
Extract:
[T]he only remaining point at issue is to determine the effects of the reinstatement order, with all the legal consequences that this entails, effective from the date of his unlawful dismissal.
WHO argues that the requirements of the above-mentioned point 2 of the decision in Judgment 3871 would be satisfied by considering the period from that date – namely 8 March 2010 – to the date of the complainant’s actual reinstatement in his new post as a period of special leave without pay. In this respect, WHO submits that this is an adequate means to restore the complainant’s former status as a staff member holding a continuing appointment, thereby exempting him from the requirement of a probationary period in his new post and enabling him to be regarded as having maintained uninterrupted employment with WHO since his unlawful dismissal, as a period of special leave is regarded under the regulations as a period of service. Moreover, WHO emphasizes that, under the terms of this solution, it would pay the contributions to the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and the sickness and accident insurance scheme corresponding to the complainant’s employment for this period.
However, the Tribunal cannot accept WHO’s line of argument. As the Tribunal has stated on many occasions in its case law, when a reinstatement order is applied retroactively to the date when the official’s employment was unlawfully terminated, this implies that the official is considered as having remained in service after that date under the same conditions as before and is therefore entitled to the salary and other financial benefits that he would have received if this had actually been the case (see, for example, Judgments 1384, consideration 18(a), 1447, consideration 17, 2261, consideration 16, 2468, consideration 19, and 3723, consideration 8). The reinstatement “with all legal consequences that this entails” referred to in point 2 of the decision in Judgment 3871 can therefore only be construed as having such effects. Moreover, the Tribunal’s intention in this regard was made all the more clear by the fact that it also recalled, in consideration 3 of the judgment, that, since the decision to dismiss him had been set aside, the complainant was entitled in principle to the restoration of the status quo ante, which included payment of the remuneration to which he would have been entitled if he had continued to perform his duties.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1384, 1447, 2261, 2468, 3723, 3871
Keywords:
reinstatement; unpaid leave;
Consideration 9
Extract:
[I]t must be emphasized that WHO does not really have such freedom [to reinstate the complainant] since point 2 of the decision in Judgment 3871 requires it to reinstate the complainant “as far as possible”.
Keywords:
execution of judgment; reinstatement;
Judgment 4077
127th Session, 2019
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The UPU applies for interpretation and review of Judgment 3928 alleging errors of fact, inter alia, and asserts that it is impossible to give effect to the Tribunal’s order to reinstate the complainant. The complainant applies for execution of Judgment 3928.
Consideration 23
Extract:
[W]hen a decision to abolish a post is set aside by the Tribunal, there is no need for a new decision to recreate that post. Therefore, the UPU had only to make the administrative arrangements for reinstating the complainant with all the legal consequences that this entailed.
Keywords:
abolition of post; reinstatement;
Consideration 25
Extract:
[T]he [organization] could not refer to the complainant’s alleged misconduct as a reason not to reinstate him as no disciplinary proceeding has occurred in that regard, so misconduct has never been proven. It is all the more grave when considering that the alleged reason for the abolition of the posts was because of financial constraints. The abolition of a post can never be based on a staff member’s conduct, as that would constitute a hidden sanction. The [organization]’s presentation before the Council of Administration constituted a breach of the duty of care and of the adversarial principle, as the complainant was not given any opportunity to defend himself and his reputation from the allegations. The UPU must respect the dignity of its staff and preserve their reputation.
Keywords:
abolition of post; adversarial proceedings; budgetary reasons; due process; duty of care; hidden disciplinary measure; misconduct; reinstatement;
Consideration 19
Extract:
With respect to the UPU’s request that the Tribunal rescind its decision with respect to the complainant’s reinstatement and award him material damages instead, there is no reviewable error that would allow the Tribunal to grant that request.
Keywords:
application for review; material damages; reinstatement;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; complaint allowed; reinstatement;
Judgment 4065
127th Session, 2019
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: In his second complaint, the complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him, while he was on sick leave, for misconduct. In his third complaint, he challenges the dismissal decision on the merits.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The order setting aside the 17 September 2014 decision is not intended to reinstate the complainant or confer an entitlement to salary or other emoluments [...] (see Judgment 3731, under 9).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3731
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4063
127th Session, 2019
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment on disciplinary grounds.
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant asks to be reinstated in the Organization. However, according the Tribunal’s case law, the reinstatement of an official on a fixed-term contract is ordered only in exceptional cases (see Judgment 3417, consideration 9). The Tribunal does not consider this case to be exceptional and will not order the reinstatement of the complainant.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3417
Keywords:
fixed-term; reinstatement;
Judgment 4047
126th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on her with immediate effect the disciplinary measure of dismissal for serious misconduct.
Consideration 15
Extract:
No order for reinstatement should be made because if the charges are proved beyond reasonable doubt, a new decision may be made to dismiss the complainant. Depending on what findings are made about the complainant’s conduct by applying the appropriate standard of proof, dismissal might remain a proportionate response, and if it is, no issue of material damages would arise.
Keywords:
material damages; reinstatement;
Judgment 4043
126th Session, 2018
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.
Consideration 25
Extract:
For the foregoing reasons no disciplinary sanction should have been imposed on the complainant including the sanction of dismissal. The decisions of the President of 15 January 2016 and 10 June 2016 to dismiss the complainant and affirm his dismissal will be set aside. An order will be made reinstating the complainant with all legal consequences. The complainant must give credit for any earnings from professional employment during the period between 15 January 2016 and the date of his reinstatement, which shall be deducted from the amounts due. Interest will accrue at the rate of 5 per cent per annum on the resulting remuneration arrears from due dates until the date of payment. The complainant is entitled to moral damages and an order for costs [...]. Exemplary damages, as sought by the complainant, are not warranted.
Keywords:
exemplary damages; reinstatement;
Judgment 4011
126th Session, 2018
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her for misconduct.
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant’s appointment, but for her dismissal, was due to expire on 31 July 2014. In those circumstances, it is inappropriate to order her reinstatement (see Judgment 3908, consideration 21). Nonetheless, she is entitled to moral and material damages for the breach of her right to due process and unlawful dismissal.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3908
Keywords:
reinstatement;
Judgment 4009
126th Session, 2018
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term contract following the abolition of his post, but to give him a Project Staff contract.
Consideration 16
Extract:
[I]n the circumstances of this case, there are no grounds for ordering the complainant’s reinstatement, given the amount of time that has passed, and bearing in mind the fact that, as already stated, the complainant did not hold a contract of indefinite duration and that the organisation is facing financial difficulties.
Keywords:
reinstatement;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
