Judicial review (538, 540, 542, 544, 547, 548, 549, 550, 551, 553, 555, 557, 558, 862, 559, 561, 563, 565, 569, 571, 572, 927, 841,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Judicial review
Total judgments found: 548
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 | next >
Judgment 1444
79th Session, 1995
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Termination of an appointment is a discretionary decision which the Tribunal will set aside only on limited grounds".
Keywords:
contract; discretion; executive head; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; separation from service;
Judgment 1438
79th Session, 1995
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was denied a further extension of the period in which he was entitled to claim the refund of removal expenses. The Tribunal considers that "in accordance with its case law, [it] will not substitute its own views for those of the director-general in a matter in which he has discretion."
Keywords:
case law; discretion; executive head; judicial review; new time limit; refund; removal expenses; time limit;
Judgment 1437
79th Session, 1995
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant was transferred against his wishes to another unit. There was nothing improper in the decision to transfer him. "The transfer was in the organization's interests" and took lawfully into account such facts as the reform of his old unit and the need for more staff in his new one.
Keywords:
discretion; executive head; judicial review; organisation's interest; reorganisation; transfer;
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant was transferred against his wishes to another unit. Thereis no reason to regard his transfer as hidden disciplinary action or to attribute it to his staff union work, it having been taken in the organization's interests.
Keywords:
abuse of power; evidence; hidden disciplinary measure; judicial review; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; staff union activity; transfer;
Judgment 1436
79th Session, 1995
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"As was said for example in Judgment 1223, the Tribunal will not interfere with comparison of candidates in a competition. Only when it appears that the choice rests on a mistake of fact or law or that there has probably been misuse of authority will the Tribunal order the defendant to produce further evidence so that it may review such comparison."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1223
Keywords:
abuse of power; burden of proof; candidate; case law; competition; due process; evidence; further submissions; judicial review; mistake of fact; misuse of authority; presumption of innocence; qualifications; selection procedure;
Judgment 1419
78th Session, 1995
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
"The second sentence of [Article VIII of the Tribunal's Statute] does no more than allow an alternative, to which the Tribunal may resort as it deems fit, in the particular case where there is difficulty over discharging some non-financial obligation. The reference in the article to the possibility of awarding 'compensation for the injury caused' does not preclude the Tribunal's determining, in exercise of the competence conferred by the first sentence, the financial consequences of an organisation's failure to abide by its staff regulations or to discharge its contractual obligations."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
allowance; compensation; iloat statute; injury; judicial review; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1418
78th Session, 1995
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The purpose of probation is to ensure that new staff members are the best qualified. So an organisation must be allowed the widest measure of discretion in the matter and its decision will stand unless the defect is especially serious or glaring. Moreover, where the reason for refusal of confirmation is unsatisfactory performance the Tribunal will not replace the organisation's assessment with its own."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; limits; probationary period; purpose; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not replace with its own assessment that of the complainant's supervisors, whose experience and technical knowledge better equip them to identify his shortcomings."
Keywords:
judicial review; limits; supervisor; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence that the Union did not break the rules of due process. Indeed [the complainant] has had unfettered access to the channels for internal appeal under the Staff Regulations, since he put his case to the Joint Appeals Committee before coming to the Tribunal."
Keywords:
internal appeals body; judicial review; right of appeal; right to reply;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"According to the case law a decision not to renew a staff member's appointment is discretionary and will be set aside only if taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if 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 abuse of authority. Those criteria hold good for any discretionary decision, but in reviewing a decision not to confirm the appointment of a probationer the Tribunal will be particularly cautious; otherwise probation would fail to serve as a period of trial."
Keywords:
case law; contract; discretion; judicial review; limits; non-renewal of contract; probationary period; purpose;
Judgment 1416
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant charged the organization with breach of equal treatment when it assigned her to a new career path. The answer the Director-General gave her was ambiguous. "The Tribunal cannot therefore review the Director-General's reason for declining to put her on the same path as the other official, nor tell whether cern abided by the rules on fairness. Not having enough evidence to make a ruling, it will quash the impugned decision, though it will not order cern to put her on path iv as she asks."
Keywords:
assignment; career; equal treatment; equity; grounds; judicial review; promotion; refusal;
Judgment 1415
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1413, consideration 6.
Keywords:
breach; equal treatment; evidence; judicial review;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"As stated in Judgment 1354 and others delivered this day on similar cases, the tribunal has limited power of review over the Director-General's appraisal of performance for the purpose of choosing career paths."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1354, 1412, 1413, 1414, 1416
Keywords:
case law; discretion; executive head; grade; judicial review; qualifications;
Judgment 1414
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1413, consideration 6.
Keywords:
breach; equal treatment; evidence; judicial review;
Judgment 1413
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant's charge of "discriminatory and unfair treatment is in too general terms to be entertained".
Keywords:
breach; equal treatment; evidence; judicial review;
Judgment 1412
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant alleges that the procedure that led to his assignment on a career path was flawed inasmuch as the official who sign the decision, the Director-General, was also at the material time leader of the division that the complainant was working in. "It may be a pity that at two decisive stages in the procedure one and the same person was called upon to choose the complainant's career path; but the coincidence was due to a duplication of function which in itself was not wrong. Only if the Director-General's decision proved not to be impartial and objective would it be set aside."
Keywords:
assignment; bias; career; flaw; judicial review; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1392
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 36
Extract:
The complainant objects to the actuarial method which the organisation used in a study of the pension fund's foreseeable costs. "Like any public authority, the EPO enjoys a presumption in its favour - especially when it is taking technical measures and it has done thorough preparatory work - that its choice of actuarial method is the most suitable and the fairest. [...] It is of course open to a staff member under a system of administrative law to challenge the organisation's choice, but he must be able to adduce evidence to show why the chosen method, when compared with others, may suffer from technical flaws that should have disqualified it."
Keywords:
actuarial valuation; burden of proof; contributions; discretion; evidence; increase; judicial review; mistake of fact; organisation; pension; reckoning; right of appeal;
Judgment 1391
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Decisions taken by the organisation are subject to review on grounds such as bias, bad faith, malice and abuse of authority. When seeking to defend his interests by impugning any such decision, an employee is entitled to allege and attempt to establish such grounds. A fair decision cannot be reached upon such matters by an internal appeals body or by this Tribunal if witnesses, parties and their representatives are unable to speak candidly and without the risk of incurring a penalty for what they may say, and especially if one party is unduly inhibited by the fear that failure to prove his case my make him liable to disciplinary action by the other party."
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; burden of proof; complainant; complaint; disciplinary measure; evidence; freedom of speech; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; misuse of authority; submissions; testimony; tribunal;
Judgment 1390
78th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"Even supposing that the complainant applied only for transfer, the Tribunal's ruling in Judgment 1359 means - see under 5, 6 and 7 - that if an official applies for a transfer to a post to be filled by some other procedure he still has a legitimate interest, and any breach of that interest is liable to review and sanction."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1359
Keywords:
case law; cause of action; competition cancelled; internal candidate; judicial review; official; transfer;
Judgment 1386
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
Consistent precedent has it "that the administrative authority has the widest measure of discretion in confirming the appointment of a probationer (see Judgments 503, [...] under 2; 687, [...] under 2; 1052, [...] under 4; and 1161, [...] under 4). The purpose of such discretion is to ensure that the organisation may choose staff in full freedom and independence and in so doing it will assess the imponderable aspects of the probationer's personality, which must pose no threat to the harmony of staff relations. Here the Tribunal will not intervene in the administration's choice except in the event of abuse of authority or a clear mistake of law or of fact."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 503, 687, 1052, 1161
Keywords:
case law; contract; criteria; discretion; judicial review; official; organisation's interest; permanent appointment; probationary period; working relations;
Judgment 1376
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The organization has asked that if its objections to receivability are not upheld the Tribunal send the case back to the Headquarters Board of Appeal. The Tribunal will not do so. The Board has already had the opportunity to go into the merits but declined to do so, and there is no call to afford it the opportunity again."
Keywords:
due process; internal appeals body; judicial review; organisation's duties; refusal; remand;
Judgment 1375
77th Session, 1994
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The want of proper delegation of the right to sign will not necessarily be fatal to a decision. What matters is the actual wording, and it may be necessary to refer to the evidence to determine who really took it."
Keywords:
application for quashing; decision; decision-maker; delegated authority; judicial review;
Judgment 1372
77th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"As the Tribunal held in Judgments 1177 [...], under 5, and 1323 [...], under 9, an item that forms part of the proceedings that led to the impugned decision may not be withheld from scrutiny by the Tribunal. That holds good for any appellate body. So the administration ought to have disclosed to the Regional Board the documents it required to enable it to take up the complainant's appeal properly."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1177, 1323
Keywords:
case law; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; flaw; internal appeal; internal appeals body; judicial review; moral injury; procedure before the tribunal;
Judgment 1369
77th Session, 1994
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
An international organisation is "free to choose whatever methods or means it likes - be they formal rules or contracts of employment - to define the terms of appointment of staff. But any collective agreement it does conclude becomes part of the law of the international civil service. Signing such an agreement puts it under obligations in law; a member of its staff may plead such obligations in a complaint to the Tribunal; and the Tribunal will review compliance with the letter and spirit of the agreement."
Keywords:
collective agreement; collective rights; international civil service principles; judicial review; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; right; right of appeal; staff union agreement; working conditions; written rule;
Consideration 28
Extract:
"The duty to explain a decision is a general principle of administrative law: the decision-maker must at least give such statement of the reasons for the decision that anyone it affects may defend his rights and the Tribunal may rule on any case before it. But the content of the duty will vary with the nature of the decision."
Keywords:
duty to substantiate decision; general principle; judicial review; motivation; motivation of final decision; purport; right of appeal; right to reply;
Judgment 1368
77th Session, 1994
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The plea of breach of acquired rights is receivable and in ruling on it the Tribunal may take into account any issues of fact it deems material." Citing Judgment 986 [...], the Tribunal holds that "an employee may properly plead a decline in his situation tantamount to impairment of the essential and fundamental terms of his employment, even if the decline has been gradual and due to an accumulation of decisions which are no longer open to challenge and none of which, taken singly, would have been declared unlawful."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 986
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; breach; case law; cumulative decisions; flaw; judicial review; receivability of the complaint; terms of appointment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 | next >
|
