Judgment No. 267
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant maintains that the circumstances of his dismissal damaged his reputation. "There is nothing dishonourable about having to retire at the normal age stipulated in the Staff Regulations. Moreover [...] the organization gave him a written testimonial thanking him for his services over the past twenty-two years, and that served to remove - assuming it were necessary - the prejudice he has alleged."
Keywords
lack of injury; staff regulations and rules; enforcement; contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; retirement; age limit; refusal; extension beyond retirement age
Consideration 1
Extract:
Under the applicable provisions, headquarters officials must retire at the age of 62 "unless the Director-General [decides] otherwise for exceptional reasons in the interests of the organization." In the present case, "the Director-General abided by the general rule and was indeed in no way required to grant an exemption."
Keywords
headquarters official; contract; retirement; age limit; discretion; organisation's interest; extension beyond retirement age
Summary
Extract:
The age limit for headquarters officials is 62, unless otherwise decided by the Director-General for exceptional reasons; for field officials there is a possibility of remaining in service until 65, but not as a matter of course [not applicable to holders of fixed-term appointments]. The complainant had been appointed project director; he was subsequently recalled to headquarters and informed that his contract would terminate. The Tribunal dismisses his claim for the quashing of the decision to retire him.
Keywords
field; headquarters official; exception; contract; retirement; age limit; discretion; executive head; difference; extension beyond retirement age
Consideration 1
Extract:
The complainant had reached retirement age and his employment was not extended by the Director-General. "[I]t does not appear from the dossier that on his return to headquarters the complainant was promised any further appointment." Nor did the material letter "imply any such promise, particularly since it was not addressed to the complainant."
Keywords
headquarters; evidence; lack of evidence; transfer; contract; offer; promise; retirement; age limit; consequence
| 
