No provision (239, 240,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: No provision
Total judgments found: 80
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
Judgment 2312
96th Session, 2004
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The [EMBL] Staff Rules and Regulations do not provide an internal appeal mechanism for a person in the complainant's position. The Tribunal has frequently commented on the desirability and utility of internal appeal procedures which not only make the Tribunal's task easier but also substantially reduce its workload by bringing a satisfactory and less expensive resolution to many disputes at an earlier stage. In any case, the Tribunal remains the ultimate arbiter of the rights of international civil servants and it can, and will, exercise its jurisdiction in appropriate cases."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; iloat; internal appeal; judicial review; last instance; no provision; official; procedure before the tribunal; recommendation; right; settlement out of court; staff regulations and rules; vested competence;
Consideration 3
Extract:
Under the EMBL Staff Rules and Regulations, there is no provision to appeal internally the non-renewal of a contract. "There is [...] no merit to the Laboratory's suggestion that the deliberate exclusion in the Staff Rules and Regulations of an internal appeal mechanism with regard to the non-renewal of a contract operates so as to exclude complaints to the Tribunal. The Tribunal's jurisdiction is not determined by an organisation's Staff Rules but by the terms of the Tribunal's own Statute and the defendant organisation's submission to it. Thus, an organisation cannot unilaterally preclude the right to lodge a complaint. While it is the case that the Tribunal will often defer to discretionary decisions, the fact that a decision is discretionary does not take it outside of the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Although a discretionary decision may warrant significant deference, it is still reviewable."
Keywords:
acceptance; competence of tribunal; complaint; consequence; contract; decision; definition; discretion; effect; iloat; iloat statute; internal appeal; judicial review; no provision; non-renewal of contract; omission; organisation; procedure before the tribunal; provision; right; right of appeal; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2263
95th Session, 2003
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The question to be resolved is that of whether, for the purposes of service order No. 99 [which defines the conditions and formalities governing the granting of a personal promotion], the period in excess of the 12-month maximum duration stipulated for short-term contracts should be taken into account in calculating the 18 years of continuous service. The answer is necessarily affirmative. [...] Once [the first 12-month period] had elapsed, the complainant must be considered to have been in service [...], even in the absence of a provision to that effect and taking into account the contracts he was granted thereafter. Regarding the [one month] break in service which occurred [subsequently], it is necessary to establish whether this prevented the complainant from completing the 18 years of continuous service [...] The Tribunal considers that it did not. The evidence on file, and particularly an affidavit produced by the complainant as an annex to his written submissions, shows that the break imposed on the complainant was justified only by the fact that he was employed under short-term contracts. since the Tribunal has determined that the complainant must be deemed to have been in service from 17 November 1982 onwards, the break in question must be viewed as a period of leave."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: SERVICE ORDER No. 99
Keywords:
continuance of operations; contract; duration of appointment; fixed-term; interpretation; leave; no provision; personal promotion; promotion; reckoning; seniority; short-term; successive contracts; unpaid leave; validation of service;
Judgment 2256
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 14-16
Extract:
"With regard to the role of a tax reimbursement agreement, the Tribunal stated the following [in judgment 2032]: "It would be strange indeed if the absence of [a tax reimbursement agreement (TRA)] could be invoked by an international organisation or its member states to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. If a member state in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that state."[T]he evident corollary of that statement is that it would similarly be strange if the existence of an agreement could be invoked by an international organisation to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. Such an agreement is meant to set the terms of a member state's commitment to refund an organisation for tax reimbursements. It must, however, conform with international law and cannot be used to undermine the fundamental principles of tax exemption recalled by the Tribunal. Thus, even if the text of the TRA had the reach which the organisation contends for it, which may be doubted, it would simply be unenforceable as being contrary to law. [...] It is likewise with the provisions of the Staff Regulations which, in the organisation's submissions, would limit the complainant's right to tax reimbursement to the amounts actually paid to the organisation by the United States under the TRA. Like the TRA itself, the Staff Regulations must be in conformity with the requirements of the law and where they are not, they are simply unenforceable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2032
Keywords:
equal treatment; international civil service principles; member state; no provision; privileges and immunities; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 2232
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant, who had been the Organisation's Director-General, impugns the decision to terminate his appointment. The Organisation raises an objection to receivability, arguing that the complainant was not a staff member. "The defendant [...] considers that since the particular case of the Director-General of the Organisation was not expressly provided for in the texts on which the Tribunal's jurisdiction is based, an express provision recognising its jurisdiction would have been necessary. It points out that [another international organisation] (UNESCO), having realised that it had no statutory provision nor any contractual stipulation attributing jurisdiction in the event of a dispute involving its Director-General, decided in 1999 to include such a clause in the contract it signed with him. whilst the Tribunal does not deny that UNESCO thereby clarified difficulties which were liable to arise, it does not view that as authority for the reverse proposition that contracts containing no such clause, entered into by other organisations with their respective chief administrative officers, must be deemed to exclude the jurisdiction of the Tribunal."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; contract; decision; exception; executive head; grounds; interpretation; no provision; organisation; provision; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; termination of employment; written rule;
Judgment 2129
93rd Session, 2002
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The complainants [state] that, according to the Tribunal's case law (see Judgment 1821, for example), adjustments to international civil servants' salaries must satisfy objective criteria of stability, foreseeability and transparency. The Tribunal considers that this line of precedent - concerning the determination of staff salaries, which is necessarily governed by very strict rules - is not entirely applicable to the determination of allowances granted for a specific purpose, such as that of covering expenses incurred by staff members on travel status. Even if it claims to be acting in the exercise of its discretion, and although the legal framework surrounding its action remains vague or non-existent, the administration must base its decisions on objective considerations and avoid breaching any of the guarantees protecting the independence of international civil servants."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821
Keywords:
adjustment; allowance; analogy; breach; case law; compensatory allowance; compensatory measure; criteria; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; independence; no provision; official; official travel; organisation's duties; purpose; safeguard; salary; travel expenses; written rule;
Judgment 2089
92nd Session, 2002
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
From 1986 to 2000 the organisation followed the practice followed by the coordinated organizations in adjusting both salaries and pensions in accordance with both cost-of-living and standard-of-living adjustments. In July 2000 it made a cost-of-living adjustment mandatory for pensions even if no such adjustment is made to salaries, but no provision is made for standard-of-living adjustment to pensions. "It is to no avail that the complainants criticise the effectiveness of the change or the accuracy of the calculations on which it was based, for those are not matters within the Tribunal's competence."
Keywords:
adjustment; amendment to the rules; competence of tribunal; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; iloat; no provision; pension; pension adjustment system; period; practice; reckoning; salary;
Consideration 9
Extract:
From 1986 to 2000 the organisation followed the practice followed by the coordinated organizations in adjusting both salaries and pensions in accordance with both cost-of-living and standard-of-living adjustments. In July 2000 it made a cost-of-living adjustment mandatory for pensions even if no such adjustment is made to salaries, but no provision is made for standard-of-living adjustment to pensions. "It is simply untenable to argue that the [organisation] could, by following the practice of the coordinated organizations in previous years, bind itself to do so for all time [...] There can be no doubt that the same body that had the authority to adopt [the] decision [to follow the practice followed by the coordinated organizations] had equally the authority to decide to withdraw it."
Keywords:
adjustment; amendment to the rules; competence; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; decision quashed; executive body; no provision; organisation's duties; pension; pension adjustment system; period; practice; salary;
Judgment 2018
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant's appointment was not confirmed after a probationary period and his employment was terminated before the expiry of his fixed-term contract. "The Tribunal finds that the Staff Regulations, Rules and Administrative Directives in force at the time do not contain specific provisions for the non-confirmation of fixed-term appointments during or at the end of a probationary period. The provisions relating to the termination of fixed-term appointments without probationary periods therefore apply."
Keywords:
administrative instruction; analogy; applicable law; contract; fixed-term; no provision; probationary period; refusal; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;
Judgment 1889
87th Session, 1999
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant was assigned to Chad in 1991 and contracted Hepatitis B in 1993. "The Appeals Committee considers that the medical service did not completely fulfil its role and did not offer the staff member concerned the advice that it could have supplied. The Appeals Committee even refers to responsibility being equally shared'. In practice, there could be no grave fault of the medical service incurring the responsibility of the organization unless the protective measures recommended by a competent authority had been disregarded. In the material case, the organization demonstrates that in 1991 [...] the World Health Organization's guidelines did not specifically recommend vaccination against Hepatitis B for persons posted to African countries affected by an endemic illness of this type."
Keywords:
breach; illness; liability; medical consultant; negligence; no provision; organisation; organisation's duties; rule of another organisation; service-incurred;
Judgment 1877
87th Session, 1999
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4(c)
Extract:
There is no evidence to suggest that the staff member was to blame for not knowing that the rule at issue could be applied to him. Its terms should not allow for any ambiguity. While it may certainly be difficult to draft rules which do not need to be rectified subsequently, an organisation should not allow staff members to suffer the full consequences of such shortcomings.
Keywords:
duty to be informed; duty to know the rules; ignorance of the rules; no provision;
Judgment 1659
83rd Session, 1997
European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainants "did not go to the Board until [...] six-and-a-half months after they had had notice of dismissal. The [objection to receivability] would no doubt succeed if the rules set a time limit for appeal, but they do not. It is perhaps a pity that the complainants tarried until the very eve of dismissal. But they did expressly reserve their rights when acknowledging receipt of notice of dismissal, and they were hoping until the last day for a satisfactory outcome. So it is hardly arguable that some time limit which was not even in the rules was running against them."
Keywords:
exception; internal appeal; internal remedies exhausted; no provision; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1502
81st Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The time limit must start at the date at which payment becomes due. If that were not so, the lapse of time would work to the claimant's detriment for as long as the rules precluded his making the claim. To make the would-be claimant wait, for any reason, before making the claim bars repayment. So the staff have grounds for supposing that they are not free [under Staff Regulation R VIII 1.01] to make claims until they can group." That being a reasonable construction, "for CERN to impose a narrower one would be an abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF REGULATION R VIII 1.01
Keywords:
good faith; interpretation; no provision; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; time bar; time limit; written rule;
Judgment 1355
77th Session, 1994
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"There is no rule or principle of law that requires the Director-General to state in so many words just why he has turned someone down for promotion or appointment. What matters is that, if the official asks, the reasons must be revealed. Otherwise the Tribunal may not exercise its power of review and determine whether the reasons are lawful and the decision sound."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; decision; duty to substantiate decision; general principle; grounds; judicial review; no provision; official; organisation's duties; post; promotion; refusal; request by a party; subsidiary; written rule;
Judgment 1125
71st Session, 1991
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Where the Rule [viz. Article 25 of the 1956 Staff Rules] is silent the competent authority - here the Administrative Committee - does have discretion to set the amount of the contribution to be paid from the date of retirement. But its decision will not be immune to review by the Tribunal, which will interfere if it finds some mistake of fact or of law [etc.]". The decision to do away with the material benefit is in breach of Article 25 and cannot stand.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 25 OF THE 1956 STAFF RULES
Keywords:
amount; breach; contributions; discontinuance; discretion; judicial review; no provision; organisation; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1095
70th Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant's fees for difficult confinement were refunded at the 100 per cent rate up to a maximum limit reckoned by likening the treatment she received to a surgical operation. Though the Tribunal finds nothing wrong with setting maximum limits in general it holds that there was no valid limit at the material time on costs incurred for difficult confinements and that the complainant was entitled to the refund of her confinement expenses in full.
Keywords:
amount; analogy; flaw; health insurance; maximum limit; medical expenses; no provision; rate; reckoning; refund;
Judgment 1082
70th Session, 1991
Intergovernmental Council of Copper Exporting Countries
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
As stated in Judgment 873 (in re Da) the CIPEC Staff Regulations do not provide for internal appeal. But that does not preclude the organisation's entertaining such an appeal ex gratia."The complainant addressed an appeal to the decision- making authority" before the expiry of ninety days from the date of the original decision and the Secretary-General's answer was to uphold that decision. So it is fair to take the ninety days as running from the date of confirmation and treat the complaint as filed in time."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 873
Keywords:
complaint; internal appeal; no provision; receivability of the complaint; start of time limit; time limit;
Judgment 1064
70th Session, 1991
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2, Summary
Extract:
On 3 April 1990 the complainant filed an application for interpretation of Judgment 972, which was delivered on 27 June 1989. Neither the Statute nor the Rules of Court set any time limit for the filing of such applications (see Judgment 538). The Tribunal will look at the circumstances in which a claim is made before deciding what constitutes a reasonable time. In the instant case the complainant is not guilty of such delay as to make his application irreceivable.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 538
Keywords:
application for interpretation; no provision; reasonable time; receivability of the complaint; time limit;
Judgment 1004
68th Session, 1990
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
The complainant's candidature in an internal competition was rejected on the grounds that he had not served the ILO for an unbroken period of two years. He submits that the Staff Regulations nowhere lay down such a condition. The plea fails. The two-year requirement was clear from the competition announcement; it also appears to have been a standard and long-standing condition for entering internal ILO competitions.
Keywords:
appointment; competition; condition; internal competition; no provision; practice; vacancy notice;
Judgment 974
66th Session, 1989
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"In the absence of a specific provision in the Rules, the Tribunal holds that, for the reasons it stated in Judgments 470 [...] and 891 [...], the right to the application of the reduction-in-force procedure arises on the abolition of a post of indefinite duration even though the official may have only a fixed-term appointment."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1050.2 OF THE PAHO STAFF RULES
ILOAT Judgment(s): 470, 891
Keywords:
abolition of post; contract; duration of appointment; fixed-term; no provision; non-renewal of contract; permanent appointment; post; procedure before the tribunal; right; staff reduction;
Judgment 944
65th Session, 1988
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant and her husband are both officials of the EPO. There are no rules concerning the refund of medical expenses which cover such contingencies. The Tribunal holds that "no other provision of the Service Regulations may be applied, even by analogy, if intended to fit an essentially different set of circumstances."
Keywords:
analogy; applicable law; enforcement; health insurance; marital status; medical expenses; no provision; other; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 891
64th Session, 1988
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"In the absence of a definition in the Rules the post, though it began as a post of limited duration, became one of indefinite duration when prolonged after the period for which it had been created."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 1050.2 OF WHO STAFF RULES
Keywords:
consequence; contract; definition; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; no provision; permanent appointment; post; successive contracts;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
|
