|
|
 |
|
|
Waiver of right of appeal (99,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Waiver of right of appeal
Total judgments found: 27
1, 2 | next >
Judgment 4395
131st Session, 2021
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the amount of compensation awarded to him for the cessation of his shift work activities following a reorganisation.
Considerations 3-4
Extract:
[The complainant] objected to the conditions proposed during the course of the settlement negotiations, which had ensued to mitigate the adverse financial impact on him of the termination of his shift work. The proposed conditions were that he should commit to keep the terms of the settlement confidential and not to challenge the final agreement by way of an internal appeal.
The foregoing contentions are unfounded. In the first place, the subject conditions are usual in negotiated settlement agreements, and, as the Tribunal stated in Judgment 3867, consideration 5, it is entirely acceptable for an official to waive a right to appeal or to file a complaint in return for the benefits gained from a settlement (see also Judgment 4161, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3867, 4161
Keywords:
amicable settlement; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 4223
129th Session, 2020
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns UNESCO’s refusal to grant her claim for a lump sum in lieu of a special post allowance.
Consideration 5
Extract:
[P]ursuant to the aforementioned clause preventing any challenge or appeal by the complainant concerning the terms of her departure from UNESCO, this complaint is irreceivable, as was, for the same reason, the request for the disputed allowance submitted to the Organization (see, for a similar precedent, Judgment 1934, consideration 7, or Judgments 2368, consideration 7, 3486, consideration 5, 3867, consideration 16, and 4161, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1934, 2368, 3486, 3867, 4161
Keywords:
amicable settlement; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 4161
128th Session, 2019
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the validity of a settlement agreement.
Consideration 11
Extract:
In signing the agreement that was offered to him, the complainant waived his right to file new internal appeals, to pursue the appeals that he had initiated and to file complaints with the Tribunal. The case law acknowledges the validity and legitimacy of such agreements and considers that the resulting infringement of a complainant’s right to appeal is not unlawful (see Judgment 3867, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3867
Keywords:
amicable settlement; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 4072
127th Session, 2019
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the lawfulness of the mutually agreed separation agreement which he signed.
Consideration 4
Extract:
The defendant raises an objection to the receivability of the complaint, namely that the complainant, by signing the separation agreement, waived his right to challenge either the validity or the content thereof. However, since the complainant contends that he signed this agreement as a result of misrepresentation and pressure which vitiated his consent, this question of receivability is inseparable from the merits of the case (see Judgment 3424, consideration 12). As is also conceded by the defendant, the decision on the objection to receivability depends on the legal validity of the separation agreement, and this makes it necessary to consider the complainant’s pleas on the merits (see, in this regard, Judgments 3610, consideration 6, and 3750, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3424, 3610, 3750
Keywords:
agreed termination; duress; lack of consent; receivability of the complaint; separation agreement; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 4071
127th Session, 2019
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the lawfulness of the mutually agreed separation agreement which they signed.
Consideration 5
Extract:
The defendant raises an objection to the receivability of the complaints, namely that the complainants, by signing the separation agreements, waived their right to challenge either the validity or the content thereof. However, since the complainants contend that they signed these agreements as a result of misrepresentation and pressure which vitiated their consent, this question of receivability is inseparable from the merits of the case (see Judgment 3423, consideration 13). As is also conceded by the defendant, the decision on the objection to receivability depends on the legal validity of the separation agreements, and this makes it necessary to consider the complainants’ pleas on the merits (see, in this regard, Judgments 3610, consideration 6, and 3750, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3423, 3610, 3750
Keywords:
agreed termination; duress; lack of consent; receivability of the complaint; separation agreement; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 3902
125th Session, 2018
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to pay him the indemnity due in the event of the closure of the CDE.
Consideration 12
Extract:
In [the complainant's] opinion, the CDE committed an abuse of authority by granting an indemnity only to those staff members who agreed to sign the settlement agreement and who waived their right of appeal. Such reasoning is tantamount to considering that any agreement providing for waiver of the right of appeal is unlawful. This is, however, inconsistent with the case law of the Tribunal, which held in Judgment 3867, under 5, that “in the context of a settlement, as is the case here, the infringement of an official’s right to appeal or file a complaint is not unlawful. On the contrary, it is entirely acceptable for an official to waive such rights in return for the benefits gained from the settlement. This is, furthermore, common practice in the context of separation agreements, as here.” Naturally, as this judgment makes clear, the agreement must make provision for benefits over and above those stemming from the applicable staff regulations, otherwise this would amount to undue pressure brought to bear on the official in return for nothing but the organisation’s honouring of its own duties (see Judgment 2715, under 13; see also Judgment 3091, under 13).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2715, 3091, 3867
Keywords:
waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 3900
125th Session, 2018
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her contract owing to the closure of the CDE and the terms and conditions of that termination.
Consideration 13
Extract:
The allegation that awarding an indemnity higher than that provided for in the Staff Regulations only to staff members who were prepared to sign the settlement agreement and who renounced any right of appeal constitutes an abuse of authority is tantamount to saying that an agreement containing a waiver of the right of any action or appeal would be flawed. This is, however, inconsistent with the case law of the Tribunal which recalled in Judgment 3867, under 5, that “in the context of a settlement, as is the case here, the infringement of an official’s right to appeal or file a complaint is not unlawful. On the contrary, it is entirely acceptable for an official to waive such rights in return for the benefits gained from the settlement. This is, furthermore, common practice in the context of separation agreements, as here”. Naturally, as the same judgment makes clear, the agreement must make provision for benefits over and above those stemming from the applicable staff regulations, otherwise this would amount to improper pressure brought to bear on the official in return for nothing but the organisation’s honouring of its own duties (see Judgment 2715, under 13; see also Judgment 3091, under 13).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2715, 3091, 3867
Keywords:
agreed termination; lack of consent; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 2868
108th Session, 2010
South Centre
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 30
Extract:
"The Centre argues that the complainant accepted the terms of the renewal for six months and is now precluded from challenging them. In effect, it argues that the complainant has waived his right to challenge the validity of the renewal. As the Tribunal observed in Judgment 592 [...] "[w]aiver of a right to bring an action may not be presumed". As well, "[w]aiver is binding only if it is express or clearly implied on the facts". In the present case, the complainant contested the validity of the impugned decision [...] and at no time did he formally waive his right to challenge the validity of the decision. He was also in a financially vulnerable position, faced with the prospect of unemployment if he did not accept the renewal of his contract. As well, he would have potentially left himself in a situation of not having the advantages accorded to an internal candidate in a subsequent competition for a vacant post. In these circumstances, in addition to there being no evidence of an express waiver, a waiver cannot be implied on the facts."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 592
Keywords:
acceptance; extension of contract; fixed-term; good faith; non-renewal of contract; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 2715
104th Session, 2008
World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
The Secretary General of the Organization decided to follow the Appeals Board's recommendations and thus to award the complainant compensation. By a letter of 2 October 2006 he notified the complainant that he nevertheless intended to make payment of the compensation subject to an undertaking from the complainant that he would renounce the exercise of all means of appeal against the WCO. "[T]he Tribunal draws attention to the fact that the Secretary General's letter of 2 October 2006 contained an unlawful clause which should definitely be censured, in that its purpose was to make the actual payment of the sum in question subject to an undertaking from the complainant that he would renounce all means of appeals.
An international organisation commits a serious breach of the general principles of law by violating, through such conduct, international civil servants' right of appeal, especially to the Tribunal."
Keywords:
acceptance; allowance; condition; flaw; general principle; internal appeal; payment; right of appeal; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 2368
97th Session, 2004
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
In the context of a voluntary staff reduction programme the complainants signed individual letters agreeing to their termination of appointment. Once the agreed termination was concluded, neither the separation itself nor the conditions agreed upon were subject to revision. The complainants were entitled to either a termination indemnity or an end-of-service-allowance, whichever was greater. They received the termination indemnity and want the Organization to pay them the end-of-service-allowance. The Tribunal considers that "each complainant expressly waived his/her right to appeal the separation from service or to seek any form of compensation other than the payments specified in the letter of agreed termination. In view of that waiver, the complainants could not contest an overall financial settlement which [...] did not allow them to claim any further indemnity. The Tribunal finds no misrepresentation on the part of the Organization and considers that the terms of [...] the letters signed by the complainants - which have acquired contractual status - were clear. It therefore rejects the complainants' claims."
Keywords:
acceptance; agreed termination; binding character; compensatory measure; staff reduction; terminal entitlements; termination of employment; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 2049
91st Session, 2001
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
After lenghty negociations, the complainant accepted the offer of separation by mutual agreement (which increased by 50% his termination indemnity on the condition that he would not challenge the decision of separation either before the Appeals Board or the Tribunal). He pleads lack of consent. "The complainant cites financial difficulties and a 'reactive anxio-depressive clinical context' to demonstrate that he was in no state to consent freely. But the evidence shows that he had been examined by an expert chosen by mutual agreement between his doctor and the chief medical officer of [the organization] and that he had been found fit to resume work as from June 1996. There are no grounds for doubting that the complainant had all his mental faculties when, after lengthy negotiations, he finally accepted an offer which afforded him significant financial benefits. He has neither proved that his consent to the negotiated termination was deficient nor provided any evidence to cast doubt on its validity."
Keywords:
agreed termination; lack of consent; medical fitness; non-renewal of contract; offer; separation from service; terminal entitlements; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 1934
88th Session, 2000
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was offered an exceptional separation package on the condition that he not appeal his separation and/or its terms and conditions. He accepted the same day. "There is no evidence that these commitments - which the complainant now appears to regret - were tainted by a fraudulent attitude or pressure from the [organisation]. The complainant accepted the terms and conditions of the settlement that he made with the organisation, some of which were very favourable, and he cannot challenge them now."
Keywords:
abolition of post; agreed termination; good faith; terminal entitlements; termination of employment; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 1233
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant seeks the quashing of her dismissal for reasons of health. Such dismissal, she maintains, was wrong unless her incapacity was total. The claim "is receivable because several times she sought the quashing of her dismissal and put the matter to the Appeals Board. Though she did withdraw several appeals that were before the Board she never expressly waived her objections to dismissal."
Keywords:
claim; health reasons; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; receivability of the complaint; termination of employment; termination of employment for health reasons; waiver of right of appeal; withdrawal of suit;
Judgment 893
64th Session, 1988
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant's post was abolished. After remaining unemployed for nine months, he accepted the organization's offer of reinstatement on condition that it be at a lower grade level. The Tribunal holds that "the complainant has indeed waived his right of appeal by accepting the director's offer."
Keywords:
abolition of post; acceptance; contract; downgrading; offer; reassignment; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 841
63rd Session, 1987
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The Organisation "was willing, exceptionally, to issue a qualified performance assessment certificate in the form specified by the laws of the Federal Republic as part of an overall settlement in which the complainant would be reimbursed in respect of certain expenses incurred by him and he in turn would be required to give a written statement that all his claims arising from his employment with the ESO had been settled and that he would refrain from making any further claims or take any further action against the Organisation. The complainant being unwilling to give such a statement, no settlement was reached. In the absence of agreement by both parties to the terms to the proposed settlement, the ESO is under no obligation to provide the complainant with the performance assessment he seeks."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 780, 840, 842
Keywords:
certificate of service; lack of consent; offer; performance report; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 633
54th Session, 1984
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The unconditional acceptance by the complainant of the Secretary-General's offer [...] amounted to a withdrawal of any objection he may have had to the Secretary-General's placing him on leave in the first place. Any question of principle which he might have been able to raise in regard to his being placed on leave otherwise than on his own application, and any distinction he might have sought to draw between annual leave entitlement and accrued annual leave, have been rendered purely hypothetical by his acceptance of the arrangement offered".
Keywords:
abolition of post; acceptance; leave; special leave; unpaid leave; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 592
51st Session, 1983
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The organisation argues that by accepting the final extension of his appointment, the complainant waived his right to appeal and the complaint is irreceivable because it is in breach of the principles of good faith and estoppel. The Tribunal holds that waiver of a right to bring action may not be presumed; waiver is binding only if it is express or clearly implied on the facts. Mere acceptance of a decision giving him partial satisfaction does not necessarily denote waiver of the claims which had not yet been met.
Keywords:
acceptance; condition; contract; estoppel; extension of contract; good faith; receivability of the complaint; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 581
51st Session, 1983
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant's services were terminated and his post abolished. The Organization contends that the fact that the complainant accepted the indemnity provided for in the Rules constitutes a contractual agreement which precludes him from pursuing subsequent claims. "The Tribunal will, naturally, examine the circumstances in which the payment was made and accepted in considering whether or not the complainant has renounced any claim he may have had against the Organisation in connection with the termination of his services. In the circumstances of this case the Tribunal has concluded that the mere acceptance by the complainant of the said indemnity does not amount to a renunciation by him of his claim against the PAHO and is not a bar to his seeking relief."
Keywords:
abolition of post; acceptance; agreed termination; terminal entitlements; termination of employment; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 580
51st Session, 1983
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Waiver of an action may not be presumed. The plea will succeed only if there was a statement its author clearly intended should carry legal force."
Keywords:
condition; waiver of right of appeal;
Judgment 567
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"A judicial decision relates only to the dispute as it is when the decision is given: it cannot rule on a case of which the circumstances are unknown at the time." [The Tribunal had dismissed an earlier complaint for the complainants' failure to exhaust internal means of appeal.] In his final decision, the President noted that the complainants had withdrawn their internal appeal. Their new complaint, coming after that decision, is irreceivable.
Keywords:
internal appeal; judgment of the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; waiver of right of appeal;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"It is true enough that withdrawal of suit may not be presumed, but the complainants expressed their wishes clearly. It is also true that withdrawal may be cancelled at any time until it is accepted; but here it was not cancelled before the President [of the Office] took note of it."
Keywords:
acceptance; condition; waiver of right of appeal; withdrawal of suit;
1, 2 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
