Termination of employment (389, 390, 391, 393, 395, 396, 398, 843, 969,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Termination of employment
Total judgments found: 382
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 | next >
Judgment 1250
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
The complainant was dismissed for misconduct after refusing a transfer outside headquarters. He pleads that the FAO overlooked an essential fact by deciding to transfer him without taking account of his family situation. But he was allowed twelve months "to sort out the matter of his wife's career or obtain a suitable post at headquarters. He argues that he had more than 'ordinary family needs'. But there is nothing out of the ordinary about a situation where spouses each have a job at one and the same duty station, and neither wishes to give it up. [...] Such circumstances do not confer immunity against transfer on an international official. [...] The postponement of transfer by fourteen months is evidence of adequate consideration of his 'family situation and intersts'."
Keywords:
decision; disregard of essential fact; duty station; headquarters; judicial review; official; refusal; serious misconduct; staff member's interest; termination of employment; transfer;
Considerations 22-23
Extract:
The complainant was dismissed for misconduct after refusing transfer to a post outside headquarters. He alleges that summary dismissal was at odds with the principle of proportionality. The Tribunal holds that "dismissal was not a sudden decision. Furthermore, even after the proposal for dismissal he was given two opportunities to change his mind. [...] The decision to dismiss was a proper exercise of the discretion of the organization and did not infringe the principle of proportionality."
Keywords:
decision; disciplinary measure; discretion; duty station; general principle; headquarters; organisation; proportionality; refusal; serious misconduct; termination of employment; transfer;
Judgment 1247
74th Session, 1993
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant's termination has not been justified on the grounds of serious misconduct. "Reinstatement is no longer possible. The Tribunal therefore awards him, in accordance with Article VIII of its Statute, compensation in a sum of 600 dollars, the full amount of remuneration due for the rest of his contract."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE VIII OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
compensation; contract; grounds; iloat statute; reinstatement; salary; serious misconduct; termination of employment; tribunal;
Judgment 1238
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Tribunal orders the complainant's reinstatement. The organization "must do its utmost to reinstate him in the post which he held [...] or in any comparable one acceptable to him. Only if that proved impossible should it pay him additional damages equivalent to the salary, allowances and other entitlements which he would have received over a period of two years had he been reinstated in its employ as from the date of this judgment."
Keywords:
allowance; compensation; date; flaw; judgment of the tribunal; post; post held by the complainant; reinstatement; salary; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The Tribunal ordered the complainant's reinstatement in Judgment 999. But the Director-General decided that reinstatement was not in the interest of the organization and awarded him compensation. "To condemn someone to unemployment on account of a single negligent act unaccompanied by improper intention, and in circumstances that do not justify loss of confidence by the employer, is to demand a humanly impossible standard of performance by the employee and makes the right to reinstatement illusory."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 999
Keywords:
complainant; discretion; good faith; limits; negligence; organisation; organisation's interest; proportionality; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"In the circumstances the refusal of reinstatement is not justified, and the fact that dismissal occurred over five years ago does not stand in the way of reinstatement, especially since the complainant was not responsible for any of the delay. He is accordingly entitled to reinstatement."
Keywords:
date; discretion; limits; mistake of fact; organisation's interest; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"An employee who is wrongfully dismissed is ordinarily entitled to reinstatement. But the Tribunal may refuse to order it if it is not possible or advisable. It would not, for instance, order reinstatement if the circumstances of the dismissal were such that it would no longer be reasonably possible for the employee to perform his duties effectively or harmoniously or for the employer to continue to feel confidence or trust in him."
Keywords:
flaw; organisation's interest; reinstatement; termination of employment; tribunal; working relations;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Even if the Director-General has discretion to refuse reinstatement 'in the interest of the organization' he must exercise it fairly and reasonably after considering all the material facts. Here the facts were that the complainant had throughout had irreproachable appraisal reports. [...] Despite surveillance, without his knowledge, for six months prior to [the incident that led to his dismissal] no wrongdoing, negligence or irregularity on his part was discovered. [...] The Director-General has failed to take into consideration the above material facts and has erred in treating the complainant as guilty of a 'cover-up'. The refusal of reinstatement was thus not a proper exercise of whatever discretion he had in the matter."
Keywords:
complainant; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; limits; mistake of fact; negligence; organisation; organisation's interest; performance report; refusal; reinstatement; right; termination of employment;
Judgment 1233
74th Session, 1993
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"At the time of her dismissal for reasons of health under Staff Regulation 9.1 she was no longer able to carry out her duties and therefore met the conditions in that Regulation. The organization [...] afforded her all the safeguards international civil servants are entitled to. So there was no abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF REGULATION 9.1
Keywords:
abuse of power; decision; health reasons; incapacity; medical fitness; misuse of authority; right to reply; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; termination of employment for health reasons;
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 1231
74th Session, 1993
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 23
Extract:
The complainant seeks the quashing of a decision to dismiss him following the abolition of his post. The only grounds given for his dismissal are "just a broad allusion to the organization's 'service requirements' or 'interests'. Such terms are meaningless unless there is a fuller explanation enabling the staff member and, if need be, the Tribunal to grasp the actual reasons, especially where the outcome is as drastic as abolition of post and dismissal."
Keywords:
abolition of post; decision; duty to substantiate decision; judicial review; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; purport; staff member's interest; termination of employment;
Consideration 26
Extract:
As the Tribunal has often held "there must be objective grounds for abolition, which must not be used as a pretext for dislodging undesirable staff: see Judgments 334 [...], under 5; 523 [...], under 5; 756 [...], under 2; and 807 [...], under 16 and 17."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 334, 523, 756, 807
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; case law; misuse of authority; organisation's duties; purpose; termination of employment;
Consideration 29
Extract:
The complainant requests the quashing of the organization's decision to terminate him and abolish his post. The Tribunal recalling - notably in Judgments 269 and 1207 - that it may exercise its power of review the conditions under which a post may be abolished and the subsequent consequences for the incumbent, determined that "the complainant's post was plainly created and abolished for no objective reasons, the sole purpose being to sort out the case of someone the organization was finding harder and harder to keep on because his presence had made for trouble."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 269, 1207
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; case law; decision; misuse of authority; termination of employment; working relations;
Judgment 1212
74th Session, 1993
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 2-4
Extract:
The complainant disputes the lawfulness of a decision to dismiss her while she was on probation. She alleges breach of her right to a hearing before dismissal. She relies on a rule for which there was a long line of precedents, among them Judgments 987 [...] and 1082 [...]. The rule is that a contract of employment creates a relationship of trust and that lays on the organization a duty to inform the staff member of its intention of dismissing him and let him defend his interests. The organization moreover must disclose its intention before it gives notice; disclosing it just before the dismissal takes effect will not do. The Tribunal holds that CERN "utterly disregarded her right to be given a prior hearing so that she might comment in detail on the reasons why she was being dismissed."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 987, 1082
Keywords:
date of notification; decision; due process; organisation's duties; right to reply; termination of employment;
Judgment 1210
74th Session, 1993
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was accused of misappropriation of funds. After an investigation he was dismissed for misconduct. He submits that the penalty of dismissal is disproportionate to his offence. "There is no evidence before the Tribunal to suggest that the penalty of dismissal was in any way excessive or unreasonable in the circumstances of this case."
Keywords:
conduct; disciplinary measure; inquiry; investigation; proportionality; termination of employment;
Judgment 1193
73rd Session, 1992
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6 to 12
Extract:
Under PAHO Staff Rule 1040 a career appointment can only be terminated after completion of the reduction-in-force procedure. The complainant submits that the notice of termination he got was premature inasmuch as the PAHO had not properly applied the reduction-in-force procedure. The Tribunal observes that "the Organization made no genuine effort to carry out the procedure properly and thereby to give the complainant the protection of the Staff Rules he was entitled to under the provisions on abolition of post." The Tribunal holds that "where a post is abolished compliance with the reduction-in-force procedure is a condition precedent to termination of the holder's appointment. Not being the outcome of a valid procedure, the notice of termination given to the complainant [...] was also invalid."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PAHO STAFF RULE 1040
Keywords:
abolition of post; due process; notice; post; procedure before the tribunal; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment;
Judgment 1175
73rd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, judgments 736 [...] and 1161 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion for the President. Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of dismissal of a probationer, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 736, 1161
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; contract; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The purpose of probation is to find out whether a probationer has the mettle to make a satisfactory career in the organisation. The competent authority will determine on the evidence before it, and possibly after extension of the probation as in the present case where doubt still lingers, whether to dismiss the official or to confirm the appointment. It must indeed be allowed the widest measure of discretion in determining whether someone it has recruited is suitable."
Keywords:
career; discretion; extension of contract; probationary period; qualifications; termination of employment;
Judgment 1161
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, Judgments 687 [...] and 736 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion for the [executive head] and the Tribunal will not substitute its own judgment for the organisation's in matters that require such exercise of discretion. Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of dismissal of a probationer, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law, or a formal or procedural flaw, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion was drawn from the evidence, or if there was abuse of authority."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 687, 736
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; probationary period; procedural flaw; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The purpose of probation is to find out whether a probationer has the mettle to make a satisfactory career in the Organisation. The competent authority will determine on the evidence before it, and possibly after extension of the probation as in the present case where doubt still lingers, whether to dismiss the official or to confirm the appointment. It must indeed be allowed the widest measure of discretion in determining whether someone it has recruited shows the highest level of qualifications required for a post in the particular field in which he is to be working."
Keywords:
discretion; extension of contract; probationary period; qualifications; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal is satisfied that in this case the President of the Office made proper exercise of the wide discretion he enjoys under Article 13(2) [of the Service Regulations] to decline, on the grounds of poor performance, to confirm the complainant's appointment."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 13(2) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
discretion; probationary period; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1157
72nd Session, 1992
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
"The first factor of material damages is the complainant's administrative and financial status at the date of dismissal. [...] the second factor is how he has fared since dismissal: else he may obtain unjust enrichment."
Keywords:
compensatory allowance; injury; material injury; termination of employment; unjust enrichment;
Judgment 1156
72nd Session, 1992
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
"The first factor of material damages is the complainant's administrative and financial status at the date of dismissal. [...] The second factor is how she has fared since dismissal: else she may obtain unjust enrichment."
Keywords:
compensatory allowance; injury; material injury; termination of employment; unjust enrichment;
Judgment 1155
72nd Session, 1992
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
"The first factor of material damages is [the complainant's] administrative and financial status at the date of dismissal [...]. Information is [also] needed on what he has been doing since leaving the organization: else he may obtain unjust enrichment. Interpol sought information from him on that score but he refused to give it. That being his attitude, any claim from him for loss of earnings cannot but fail."
Keywords:
compensatory allowance; injury; material injury; staff member's duties; termination of employment; unjust enrichment;
Judgment 1153
72nd Session, 1992
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"As the case law makes plain - for example, Judgments 687 [...] and 736 [...] - a decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is a matter of discretion [...] and the Tribunal will not substitute its own judgment for the organisation's in matters that require such exercise of discretion. [...] Although the Tribunal may review the lawfulness of the dismissal, the nature of the decision is such that its power of review is limited. It will set aside the decision only if there was a mistake of fact or law".
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 687, 736
Keywords:
case law; discretion; judicial review; probationary period; termination of employment;
Judgment 1133
72nd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant was charged with serious misconduct. An inquiry was held to which the complainant was not invited to give evidence. The Tribunal holds that "the failure of the WHO to afford the complainant an opportunity to be present at the Personnel Department's taking of statements and to put questions to the witnesses amounts to breach of due process. The Tribunal stated the material principle in Judgment 999 : whoever makes inquiries of the kind that were made in this case must be scrupulous in not taking evidence from one party without the other's knowledge. Whether or not the evidence did work to the complainant's prejudice is irrelevant. It is sufficient that it might have done so, and it is not the likelihood but the risk of prejudice that is fatal." [See Judgment 2601, under 7.]
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 999, 2601
Keywords:
due process; evidence; misconduct; right to reply; serious misconduct; termination of employment;
Judgment 1129
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"There will indeed be misuse of authority where 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." There is no evidence that the organization, which followed the prescribed procedure and did its utmost to find another post for the complainant, dismissed him for reasons other than those linked to the financial crisis it was facing.
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; budgetary reasons; definition; grounds; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; procedure before the tribunal; reassignment; termination of employment;
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant's post was abolished for reasons of financial stringency. According to Circular 1583 proposals to abolish a post must come from the competent Assistant Director-General. In this case the Assistant Director-General did not specifically name the complainant's post. He merely abolished the division which the complainant headed. It being impossible for the Director's post to survive after abolition of a division to direct, the allegation of a procedural flaw fails.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CIRCULAR NO. 1583
Keywords:
abolition of post; administrative instruction; budgetary reasons; competence; decision-maker; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; termination of employment;
Judgment 1128
71st Session, 1991
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"It is at the discretion of an international organisation to discontinue employment it has lost confidence in the staff member and no longer believes that he will show due respect for its good name, and the Tribunal will not interfere with the decision the organisation takes in the exercise of that discretion unless it finds one of the fatal flaws that warrant setting the decision aside. Such flaws include procedural defects, failure to take account of some essential fact and misuse of authority."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; organisation's reputation; staff member's duties; termination of employment;
Judgment 1127
71st Session, 1991
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant's appointment was terminated after probation. She objects to the administration's making out a supplementary probation report on her and extending - without so advising her - the period she was to spend on probation in breach of the Regulations. The pleas fail. "The probation report required by Article 36(2) [of the Staff Regulations] need not be a single document but may comprise several, even if they are made out at different dates." As to the length of her probation, it was the complainant herself who asked for the extension and it was not, in the circumstances, to her detriment.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 36(2) OF THE EUROCONTROL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
extension of contract; formal requirements; lack of injury; period; probation report; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Consideration 30
Extract:
"A decision not to confirm a probationer's appointment is at the Director General's discretion and, according to well-established precedent, a discretionary decision may be set aside only if it was taken without authority [etc.] "There will be especial caution in reviewing a decision not to confirm the appointment of a probationer in the light of the material criteria. "Where the reason for refusal of confirmation is, as in the present case, unsatisfactory performance the Tribunal will not replace with its own the organisation's assessment of the official's fitness."
Keywords:
appointment; discretion; judicial review; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1116
71st Session, 1991
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7, Summary
Extract:
The complainant argues that his post was not abolished for reasons of financial stringency. What he alleges prompted his dismissal was a desire to get rid of him, and that led to abuse of authority. He cites as evidence of this UNESCO's extension of his appointments over a five-year span for only very short periods. The Tribunal finds no evidence of liability on UNESCO's part: the organization did its utmost to seek other employment for him.
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; budgetary reasons; lack of evidence; misuse of authority; reassignment; successive contracts; termination of employment;
Judgment 1089
70th Session, 1991
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant contests the termination of his appointment and seeks reinstatement.
Keywords:
termination of employment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 | next >
|
