Judgment No. 4393

• Organization: European Patent Organisation (EPO)
• Date: 14.04.2021
• Original: English
• Judges: Hansen, Barbagallo, Rawlins
• Full judgment text - Full judgment text (french)

Decision

1. The impugned decision is set aside, as are the complainant’s June 2010 payslip and all subsequent payslips.
2. The case is remitted to the EPO for it to take the steps prescribed in consideration 8.
3. All other claims are dismissed.

Summary

The complainant challenges the reduction in his total net remuneration following his promotion to a higher grade arguing that it constitutes a breach of Article 49(13) of the Service Regulations.

Judgment keywords

Keywords

complaint allowed; case sent back to organisation; promotion; salary

Consideration 4

Extract:

The principles of statutory interpretation are well settled in the case law. The primary rule is that words are to be given their obvious and ordinary meaning (see, for example, Judgments 4178, consideration 10, 3310, consideration 7, and 2276, consideration 4). Additionally, as the Tribunal stated in Judgment 3734, consideration 4, “[i]t is the obvious and ordinary meaning of the words in the provision that must be discerned and not just a phrase taken in isolation”.

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 2276, 3310, 3734, 4178

Keywords

interpretation; interpretation of rules