Judgment 595
51st Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The material date was that on which the complainant received the letter of termination. The period of notice should begin on that date and the termination payment and the disability payment should be calculated and paid accordingly. "Any other conclusion would offend against the rule that a decision must not be retroactive in effect. [...] No organisation may retroactively alter at will the position of its staff. The effect of the WHO's arrangement might be to do away with one of the benefits prescribed" in the material Staff Rules. The decision is set aside; the complainant's administrative position must be reviewed.
Keywords:
date; date of notification; disability benefit; non-retroactivity; notice; payment; terminal entitlements; termination of employment;
Judgment 537
49th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The Tribunal interpreted the French and English versions of the relevant rule according to the usual methods. It found that the latter had not been modified when the rules were amended, that the corresponding old rule refers to a section which in no way precludes the accumulation of termination payments and disability benefits. The Tribunal took the view that it was the French text of the rule which should be applied, not the English text.
Keywords:
accumulation; disability benefit; interpretation; language of rule; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 479
47th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant draws an invalidity pension for an illness contracted when on a mission as a consultant. The rules provide for a bigger pension if a dependant's allowance had been payable. "A dependant's allowance would not have been payable to the complainant. His contract did not provide for one in addition to his salary or fee. [A] staff rule [...] excludes from the staff members entitled to a dependant's allowance short-term staff and consultants." The claim for an increase was rightly rejected.
Keywords:
allowance; contract; dependant; disability benefit; external collaborator; illness; service-incurred; short-term;
Summary
Extract:
The complainant became disabled following a disease contracted during a one-month mission. The complainant receives an invalidity pension. His incapacity was assessed by the Tribunal at 100 per cent. The amount of the pension must be redetermined. The deductions made of a university retirement pension were unwarranted they must be reimbursed, with the amounts being indexed against inflation and with interest [2 per cent]; costs.
Keywords:
amount; disability benefit; illness; incapacity; invalidity; rate; reckoning; refund; service-incurred;
Judgment 173
26th Session, 1971
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
In cases where the affected persons are at fault, their disability pension may be reduced under the applicable provision. "[T]he Tribunal cannot reduce the benefits granted to the complainant in accordance with the impugned decision [...] without there being any need to examine whether the fault attributable to the complainant would in itself have warranted the cancellation of the pension awarded, it is sufficient to find that in any case, in view of the experts' report, the reduction made under the impugned decision is in no way excessive."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 141
Keywords:
complainant; consequence; disability benefit; invalidity; judicial review; liability; misconduct; reduction of salary;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"The present complaint concerns the rate of disability pension payable under the regulations of the [organization's] staff insurance scheme [...] issued on the basis of the [...] staff regulations and rules and [...] regarded as forming part of them. The Tribunal is therefore competent to hear the complainant's claims. It is immaterial that [the regulations of the scheme] make no express provision for appeals to the Tribunal. Whatever the material legal texts in the light of which the complaint should be examined, the Tribunal's competence derives from its own statute."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 141
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; disability benefit; enforcement; health insurance; insurance; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 148
23rd Session, 1970
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
"[A]lthough the complainant's post-traumatic impairment was assessed at only 30 per cent by the Medical Board, his total incapacity for work is entirely attributable to the accident [...] and all other factors must be excluded. The complainant is accordingly entitled to the annual compensation payments laid down by [the applicable provision], i.e. to two-thirds of his final remuneration calculated on the basis of that provision."
Keywords:
cause; disability benefit; incapacity; invalidity; professional accident; rate;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The conversion of annual compensation payments to a lump sum payment as provided for under [the applicable provision] is justified only in cases of permanent incapacity. As the Medical Board considers that the complainant's condition is capable of improvement his claim for conversion is not well founded."
Keywords:
condition; disability benefit; incapacity; lump-sum; rate;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"[E]ven if the [...] injury would normally result in incapacity of only 30 per cent, it does not follow that the complainant's claim for compensation for total incapacity is unfounded. On the contrary, he would be entitled to such compensation if no factor other than the accident appears to have caused the recognised incapacity."
Keywords:
disability benefit; incapacity; invalidity; professional accident; rate; service-incurred;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant suffers from total incapacity for work. He asks the Tribunal to recommend to the Joint Staff Pension Fund to pay him a permanent pension. "The Tribunal is not competent to deal with the above claim, since the United Nations Administrative Tribunal is the competent body to hear disputes relating to benefits payable by the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complainant; disability benefit; remand; request by a party; unat; unjspf;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The Medical Board did not find that the complainant was permanently incapacitated for work and did not rule out the possibility that he might be able to resume some kind of work in the future. In these circumstances the organization must retain the right to review the complainant's case from time to time and to adjust the compensation due to him in the light of any changes."
Keywords:
disability benefit; incapacity; medical examination; organisation; right;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The compensation annuity awarded to the complainant for total incapacity for work covers all damage to his health. There can therefore be no question of awarding him additional compensation for the loss of any particular faculty or organ."
Keywords:
disability benefit; incapacity; purpose;
