Abuse of power (927,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Abuse of power
Total judgments found: 161
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 4809
137th Session, 2024
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks a contractual redefinition of his employment relationship and the setting aside of the decision not to renew his last contract.
Consideration 8
Extract:
It follows from the[se] considerations that the impugned decision must be set aside in so far as it refused to redefine the external collaboration contract for the period from 6 November to 15 December 2006, bearing in mind that, although the Organization attempts to oppose that setting aside by referring to the inviolability of the terms of a contract, that objection cannot stand in the case of misuse of the rules governing the contractual relationship between an organisation and its staff members (see, for example, Judgments 3225, consideration 7, 3090, consideration 7, 2838, consideration 8, and 2708, consideration 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2708, 2838, 3090, 3225
Keywords:
abuse of power; conversion of contract;
Judgment 4781
137th Session, 2024
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reject her complaint of harassment and abuse of authority.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abuse of power; complaint allowed; harassment;
Judgment 4696
136th Session, 2023
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to recover supposed overpayments made to him by way of expatriation allowance.
Consideration 17
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls that, according to its case law, misuse of authority may not be presumed. The burden of proof is on the official who pleads it, here being the complainant (see Judgments 4552, consideration 9, and 4437, consideration 23). The Tribunal considers that no misuse of authority has been established, especially given that, in seeking to recover the contested sums, the Organisation was simply applying the provisions of the Staff Regulations which it was entitled, or indeed required, to implement.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4437, 4552
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority;
Judgment 4691
136th Session, 2023
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close his complaint of harassment and abuse of authority.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abuse of power; complaint allowed; harassment;
Consideration 11
Extract:
[B]y framing the alleged harassing conduct involving an abuse of authority in the narrow way it did […] together with its consideration of specific issues or events in isolation, it is more likely than not that the OIG failed to consider whether the conduct as a whole involved an abuse of authority (see Judgment 2930, consideration 3) or, putting it slightly differently, whether the cumulative effect of the conduct could be reviewed as harassment and, specifically, an abuse of authority (see Judgment 4347, consideration 30).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2930, 4347
Keywords:
abuse of power; harassment; investigation;
Judgment 4688
136th Session, 2023
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select her for a developmental assignment.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[R]eference should be made to the Tribunal’s case law according to which the party asserting abuse of authority and improper motive must prove it (see, for example, Judgments 4524, consideration 15, 4467, consideration 17, 4146, consideration 10, 3939, consideration 10, 2264, consideration 7(a), and 2163, consideration 11). Similarly, the party asserting the existence of a conspiracy must prove it. In Judgment 2472, consideration 9, the Tribunal said:
“With respect to the allegations of bias and conspiracy, the burden of proving this is on the complainant [...] ‘Mere suspicion and unsupported allegations are clearly not enough, the less so where [...] the actions of the Organization which are alleged to have been tainted by personal prejudice are shown to have a verifiable objective justification.’”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2163, 2264, 2472, 3939, 4146, 4467, 4524
Keywords:
abuse of power;
Judgment 4679
136th Session, 2023
ITER International Fusion Energy Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject her complaint of harassment, discrimination and abuse of authority.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abuse of power; complaint dismissed; harassment; investigation;
Judgment 4531
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 August 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of her appointment beyond retirement age.
Considerations 12-13
Extract:
[T]hese pleas fail to recognise the wide discretionary power acknowledged and accepted by the Tribunal vested in an executive head to make decisions to retain officials beyond the normal retirement age and the concomitant limits on review by the Tribunal (see, for example, Judgments 2669, consideration 8, and 4016, consideration 10). [...]
Notwithstanding the preceding discussion about the width of the discretionary power of an executive head to extend an appointment and the limited scope of review by the Tribunal, such a decision can be challenged on the basis that the power has not been exercised bona fide or, described more generally, involved an abuse of authority.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2669, 4016
Keywords:
abuse of power; discretion; retirement age;
Judgment 4524
134th Session, 2022
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to appoint, as a development reassignment, Ms V.M. to the post of Client Relationship Manager.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant provides no persuasive evidence to prove that the decision to appoint the selected candidate was taken in bad faith or for an improper purpose (see, for example, Judgments 4261, consideration 10, and 4345, consideration 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4261, 4345
Keywords:
abuse of power; selection procedure;
Judgment 4516
134th Session, 2022
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to investigate his allegations of harassment.
Consideration 11
Extract:
As the complainant has not substantiated his allegations that the decision to close the case was taken for an improper purpose amounting to abuse of authority (see, for example, Judgments 3172, consideration 16, and 3939, consideration 10) or that it was based on bias (see, for example, Judgment 4010, consideration 9); that it was tainted by personal prejudice (see, for example, Judgment 3912, consideration 13) or bad faith (see, for example, Judgment 3902, consideration 11), there is no basis on which to grant exemplary damages which he claims (see, for example, Judgment 3092, consideration 16).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3092, 3172, 3902, 3912, 3939, 4010
Keywords:
abuse of power; bias; exemplary damages; personal prejudice;
Judgment 4467
133rd Session, 2022
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the lawfulness of the recruitment process and the resulting appointment for the post of Client Relationship Manager, for which he had applied.
Consideration 17
Extract:
The claim of abuse of authority is unsubstantiated as the complainant provides no evidence to prove that the decision to appoint the successful candidate was taken in bad faith or for an improper purpose (see, for example, Judgments 4261, consideration 10, and 4345, consideration 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4261, 4345
Keywords:
abuse of power;
Judgment 4437
132nd Session, 2021
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the classification of her post following her transfer.
Consideration 23
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that there is abuse of authority when an administration acts for reasons that are extraneous to the organisation’s best interests and seeks some objective other than those which the authority vested in it is intended to serve (see Judgments 1129, consideration 8, 2885, consideration 12, and 3902, consideration 9).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1129, 2885, 3902
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority;
Judgment 4434
132nd Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the refusal to organise a strike ballot under the new rules governing the exercise of the right to strike at the European Patent Office.
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainants are entitled to moral damages for the decision of the President not to hold a ballot for a strike they and others called for in accordance with the provisions of Circular No. 347, which constituted an abuse of power in that the President purported to exercise a power which he did not have. The President’s conduct involved a significant and unilateral derogation of the complainants’ right to strike even as arising under the materially constraining scheme in Circular No. 347 and CA/D 5/13. These moral damages are assessed in the sum of 6,000 euros for each complainant.
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority; moral injury; right to strike; strike;
Judgment 4432
132nd Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to accept only part of the recommendations of the Appeals Committee on his appeal against the postponement of a strike ballot by the President of the European Patent Office.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he complainant initially sought and still seeks moral damages. In his brief he seeks 10,000 euros moral damages “for depriving [him] of his fundamental human right to strike and taking away his fundamental right to freedom of association”. But he was not deprived of the right, at least in its entirety. There was only a delay in taking a procedural step which may have led to a strike in which the complainant would have been involved. At best for the complainant, the facts reveal the EPO failed to comply with paragraph 3 of Circular No. 347 notwithstanding that it was bound by the rules it had itself issued until it amended or repealed them (see, for example, Judgments 963, consideration 5, and 3883, consideration 20). Putting it this way is not to suggest that the non-observance was trivial. The Organisation had put in place highly contentious provisions concerning a matter of fundamental importance, namely the right to strike. It could be expected that all elements of those provisions would be followed to the letter unless there was some insuperable reason for not doing so. In this case, there was not. The President acted unilaterally and arbitrarily in breach of the scheme the Organisation had adopted and, in any event, his conduct involved an abuse of power in that he purported to exercise a power which he did not have. The complainant is entitled to moral damages which are assessed in the sum of 6,000 euros.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 963, 3883
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority; moral injury; patere legem; right to strike; strike;
Judgment 4427
132nd Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to maintain his transfer to a patent examiner post.
Consideration 12
Extract:
[T]he complainant’s contention that the transfer decision was tainted by misuse of authority is unfounded. In consideration 10 of Judgment 4146, for example, the Tribunal recalled that the principle of good faith and the concomitant duty of care require international organisations to treat their staff with due consideration in order to avoid causing them undue injury. It also observed that in order for there to be misuse of authority, it must be established that the decision rested on considerations extraneous to the organisation’s interests and that the staff member alleging abuse of authority bears the burden of establishing the improper purpose for which the authority was exercised. Misuse of authority cannot be presumed. The complainant has not provided evidence, against conjecture, that shows that his transfer was based on improper purpose.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4146
Keywords:
abuse of power; burden of proof; duty of care; evidence; misuse of authority; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4382
131st Session, 2021
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the Secretary General’s decisions to set aside her 2016 performance appraisal only on the basis that it was procedurally flawed, and to insert in her personnel file the impugned decision and the report of the Appeals Commission.
Consideration 13
Extract:
The Tribunal has observed that in order for there to be misuse of authority, it must be established that the decision rested on considerations extraneous to the organisation’s interests and that the staff member alleging abuse of authority bears the burden of establishing the improper purpose for which the authority was exercised (see, for example, Judgment 4146, under 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4146
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority;
Judgment 4370
131st Session, 2021
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to retire him at the end of the month in which he reached the age of 62, even though he had not completed the five years of contributions required for the payment of a retirement pension by the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund.
Consideration 12
Extract:
[I]nsofar as the impugned decision merely applies the normal rule of mandatory retirement for staff members who have reached the age limit, it cannot be considered that such a decision involves a misuse of authority or that it constitutes a measure which discriminates against the complainant.
Keywords:
abuse of power; discrimination; misuse of authority; retirement age;
Judgment 4345
131st Session, 2021
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to extend his temporary reassignment.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant contends that the impugned decision is vitiated by abuse of authority[...]. This contention is unsubstantiated and the Tribunal’s consistent case law holds that bad faith cannot be assumed; it must be proven (see, for example, Judgments 4261, under 10, 4161, under 9, 3154, under 7, 3902, under 11, and 2800, under 21).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2800, 3154, 3902, 4161, 4261
Keywords:
abuse of power; bad faith; misuse of authority;
Judgment 4332
131st Session, 2021
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the lawfulness of a selection procedure in which he participated and the resulting appointment.
Consideration 10
Extract:
Under the case law, misuse of authority may not be presumed and the burden of proof is on the party that pleads it (see Judgment 4081, under 19).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4081
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority;
Judgment 4283
130th Session, 2020
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to cancel a competition in which he was a candidate.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant submits that the cancellation of the first competition and the subsequent organisation of the second involved a misuse of authority.
According to him, the initial competition was in fact “cancelled for reasons of partiality, with the sole purpose of appointing officials who were to the Agency’s liking”, and the selection board’s abovementioned observation concerning the candidates’ shortcomings in terms of soft skills was merely a “pretext” used by the Organisation “to prevent the candidates being appointed”.
However, as the Tribunal has repeatedly stated, misuse of authority may not be presumed, and the burden of proof is on the party that pleads it (see, for example, Judgments 2116, under 4(a), 2885, under 12, 3543, under 20, 3939, under 10, or aforementioned 4081, under 19).
It must be noted that the complainant has not produced any evidence to corroborate his allegations. The circumstance, put forward by the complainant, that he was unsuccessful in the second competition even though he had been placed on the list of suitable candidates in the first one and that the same was true of other candidates plainly cannot, in itself, constitute such evidence.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2116, 2885, 3543, 3939, 4081
Keywords:
abuse of power; competition cancelled; misuse of authority;
Judgment 4281
130th Session, 2020
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to promote him in the 2015 promotion exercise.
Considerations 8-9
Extract:
[T]he complainant submits that he was deprived of an opportunity to be promoted for the sole reason that he exercised a part-time staff union mandate. The grievance he thereby expresses should, in the Tribunal’s view, be regarded as an allegation of misuse of authority.
In Judgment 3357, under 16, the Tribunal found that “the existence of [...] bias, which would constitute a misuse of authority, may not be presumed. It is incumbent upon the official who intends to rely on a plea of this nature to furnish at least some prima facie evidence in support thereof; mere allegations which are moreover purely speculative are immaterial here (see, for example, Judgments 1775, under 7, 2019, under 24, 2927, under 16, or 3182, under 9)”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1775, 2019, 2927, 3182, 3357
Keywords:
abuse of power; misuse of authority; personal prejudice; staff union activity;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
