|
|
|
|
Vested competence (105,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Vested competence
Total judgments found: 24
1, 2 | next >
Judgment 4857
138th Session, 2024
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant submits that the Organization committed serious misconduct that breached his rights and considers, in particular, that he was subjected to harassment.
Consideration 8
Extract:
[A]s the Tribunal has always made clear since its earliest judgments, its jurisdiction is limited and, as such, it is “bound to apply the mandatory provisions governing its competence” (see Judgment 67, consideration 3, cited in particular in Judgments 4540, consideration 4, 4458, consideration 12, and 2657, consideration 5). It follows that the Tribunal cannot rule on a complaint before it unless its competence to hear it has been clearly established. Of course, it is ordinarily the complainant’s responsibility to establish that competence, and consequently it is for a complainant alleging to be an official of an international organisation to produce the contract signed with that organisation as evidence of that status (see Judgments 2503, consideration 4, 1964, consideration 3, and 339, consideration 1).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 67, 339, 1964, 2503, 2657, 4458, 4540
Keywords:
burden of proof; vested competence;
Judgment 4458
133rd Session, 2022
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the setting aside of the information circular which, according to her, announced the closure of the UNESCO Commissary.
Consideration 12
Extract:
In his [...] letter [...] responding to UNESCO’s final observations, counsel for the complainant submits that a decision to decline jurisdiction would result in “a flagrant denial of justice on account of the lack of alternative remedies”. However, even though it may prove impossible to settle the dispute in another jurisdiction, that risk cannot allow the Tribunal to rule on a complaint which does not fall within its own jurisdiction. It should be borne in mind that, as the Tribunal has always made clear since its earliest judgments, its jurisdiction is limited and, as such, it is “bound to apply the mandatory provisions governing its competence” (see Judgment 67, consideration 3, or, more recently, Judgment 2657, consideration 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 67, 2657
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; denial of justice; vested competence;
Judgment 3260
116th Session, 2014
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: After divorce proceedings with serious financial consequences, the complainant challenges the refusal to refer to the General Council of the WTO the issue of compatibility between the judgment of the Swiss Federal Court against him and certain provisions of the Headquarters Agreement and the Pension Plan Regulations.
Considerations 19-20
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal is not competent to examine whether the Swiss Civil Code or the Swiss Federal Court decision violates the Headquarters Agreement and cannot entertain challenges to the decision itself. [...] However, as found in Judgment 3020, the Tribunal can consider an organisation’s application of its own provisions [...]. The Tribunal can also, as stated in Judgment 3105, under 5, consider the [organisation]’s application of the Headquarters Agreement."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; flaw; headquarters agreement; vested competence;
Judgment 3115
113th Session, 2012
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant alleges that senior officials misappropriated funds to the detriment of poor countries. "However, in raising that allegation before the Tribunal, she overlooks the fact that the competence of the Tribunal is clearly and exhaustively defined in Article II of its Statute, from which it follows that the Tribunal cannot interfere either with the policies of the international organisations which have recognised its competence, or with the workings of their administrations, unless a violation of the rights of a staff member is in issue. International civil servants seeking to file a complaint with the Tribunal must show that the decisions they are challenging are such as to affect personal interests of theirs which are protected by the rights and safeguards deriving from the applicable Staff Regulations and Rules, or from the terms of their appointments."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute
Keywords:
breach; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; contract; exception; iloat statute; official; organisation's reputation; provision; right; safeguard; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; supervisor; vested competence; written rule;
Judgment 3105
113th Session, 2012
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As the revised Seat Agreement is an international agreement, [...] the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to examine in any way its validity. [However] the Tribunal does have jurisdiction to consider the correctness of the application of a provision of the revised Seat Agreement".
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; flaw; headquarters agreement; international instrument; provision; vested competence;
Judgment 2915
109th Session, 2010
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"The fact that the Director General did not sign the letter [informing the complainant that her request was denied] does not mean that he did not take the relevant decision. The signing of the letter by the Director of [the Human Resources Management Department] is consistent with normal personnel practice. Moreover, the presumption of regularity applies in the absence of cogent evidence to the contrary."
Keywords:
competence; evidence; executive head; formal requirements; practice; staff regulations and rules; vested competence;
Judgment 2742
105th Session, 2008
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 44
Extract:
"The Tribunal issues binding orders, not recommendations as sought by the complainant. Additionally, the Tribunal has no power to order a party to apologise."
Keywords:
claim; competence of tribunal; receivability of the complaint; recommendation; vested competence;
Judgment 2720
105th Session, 2008
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant alleges that the ITU, in its letter to the journalist, made "scandalous" attacks on the Tribunal. "The Tribunal will not respond to the arguments presented in the complaint regarding prejudice that it allegedly suffered itself as a result of the circulation of the disputed message. The issue raised in this regard, which has no direct bearing on the dispute between the complainant and the ITU regarding compliance with obligations arising from their contractual relationship, falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, as restrictively defined in Article II of its Statute. Furthermore, the Tribunal could not rule on such arguments without breaching its duty of impartiality."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; iloat statute; injury; lack of injury; organisation's duties; staff member's duties; vested competence;
Judgment 2657
103rd Session, 2007
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant contests the decision not to appoint him to a post as examiner at the European Patent Office on the grounds that he did not meet the physical requirements for the post. The Organisation submits that the Tribunal is not competent to hear complaints from external applicants for a post in an organisation that has recognised its jurisdiction. "However regrettable a decision declining jurisdiction may be, in that the complainant is liable to feel that he is the victim of a denial of justice, the Tribunal has no option but to confirm the well-established case law according to which it is a court of limited jurisdiction and 'bound to apply the mandatory provisions governing its competence', as stated in Judgment 67, delivered on 26 October 1962. [...] It [can be inferred from Article II of the Statute of the Tribunal] that persons who are applicants for a post in an international organisation but who have not been recruited are barred from access to the Tribunal. It is only in a case where, even in the absence of a contract signed by the parties, the commitments made by the two sides are equivalent to a contract that the Tribunal can decide to retain jurisdiction (see for example Judgment 339). According to Judgment 621, there must be 'an unquestioned and unqualified concordance of will on all terms of the relationship'. That is not the case, however, in the present circumstances: while proposals regarding an appointment were unquestionably made to the complainant, the defendant was not bound by them until it had established that the conditions governing appointments laid down in the regulations were met."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute ILOAT Judgment(s): 67, 339, 621
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; consequence; contract; declaration of recognition; definition; exception; external candidate; formal requirements; grounds; handicapped person; iloat statute; intention of parties; interpretation; medical examination; medical fitness; open competition; organisation; post; proposal; provision; refusal; terms of appointment; vested competence; written rule;
Judgment 2649
103rd Session, 2007
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
Acting in his capacity as Chairman of the Staff Committee of the EPO's sub-office in Vienna, the complainant submitted a request to the President of the Office that the "staff salary scales mentioned in the annex to Part 2 of the Codex" be forwarded to all agencies supplying temporary personnel to the Office. The President refused to grant the request submitted to him, denying that temporary workers were entitled to remuneration equal to that of EPO staff and underlining that neither the Service Regulations nor the conditions of employment for contract staff applied to temporary workers. The EPO submits that the complainant does not have locus standi to represent temporary workers supplied to the Office. "It is well settled that members of the Staff Committee may rely on their position as such to ensure observance of the Service Regulations (see Judgments 1147 and 1897); but in order for a complaint submitted to the Tribunal on behalf of a Staff Committee to be receivable, it must allege a breach of guarantees which the Organisation is legally bound to provide to staff who are connected with the Office by an employment contract or who have permanent employee status, this being a sine qua non for the Tribunal's jurisdiction. In the absence of such a connection resting on a contract or deriving from status, the claim that the Office should forward its salary scales to agencies supplying temporary personnel - whose conditions of employment and remuneration are in any event beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal - cannot be entertained."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1147, 1897
Keywords:
breach; claim; communication to third party; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; contract; enforcement; equal treatment; executive head; external collaborator; locus standi; no provision; official; organisation's duties; provision; receivability of the complaint; refusal; request by a party; right; safeguard; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union; terms of appointment; vested competence;
Judgment 2623
103rd Session, 2007
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal has no authority to issue interim injunctions against organisations that have accepted its jurisdiction."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; declaration of recognition; iloat statute; judicial review; organisation; vested competence;
Judgment 2376
98th Session, 2005
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant's contract was not renewed. He later reached a settlement agreement with the ILO which stated that the decision not to renew his contract would have no consequence on any future application submitted by him. He alleges a breach of the terms of the settlement agreement. "[T]he settlement, concluded well after the complainant's loss of his position as a staff member, was not a term or condition of his appointment, nor did it form part of the Staff Regulations. The Statute [of the Tribunal], in Article II(4), requires that where the dispute relates to an agreement outside the terms of employment of a staff member, the agreement must contain a provision giving the Tribunal competence over disputes with regard to its execution so that the Tribunal can hear such a dispute. There is none. The complaint is [therefore] irreceivable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article II, paragraph 4, of the Statute
Keywords:
breach; candidate; competence of tribunal; consequence; contract; date; iloat statute; non-renewal of contract; official; post; provision; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; vested competence;
Judgment 2361
97th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal, in keeping with consistent precedent, may not replace the findings of medical boards with its own. But it does have full competence to say whether there was due process and whether the reports used as a basis for administrative decisions show any material mistake or inconsistency, or overlook some essential fact, or plainly misread the evidence (see Judgment 1284, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1284
Keywords:
case law; competence of tribunal; decision; disregard of essential fact; iloat; judicial review; limits; medical board; medical opinion; mistaken conclusion; procedure before the tribunal; report; vested competence;
Judgment 2350
97th Session, 2004
European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
The complainant seeks the revision of certain rules and policies. EFTA submits that such a claim is irreceivable. "In this it is clearly correct. Relevantly, the Tribunal is competent only to hear complaints with respect to the non-observance of the terms of appointment or the provisions of EFTA's Staff Regulations and Rules."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; breach; claim; competence of tribunal; complaint; iloat statute; provision; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment; vested competence;
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;
Judgment 1542
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"This complaint, which seeks the grant of staff union facilities [...], does concern the exercise of the freedom of association that Article 30 of the Service Regulations guarantees. So the Tribunal is competent ratione materiae under Article II(5) and (6)(a) of its Statute, whereby it is open to any official - even one whose employment has ceased - who alleges breach in substance or in form of the Staff Regulations."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II (5) AND (6)(A) OF THE STATUTE Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 30 OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; facilities; freedom of association; iloat statute; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity; status of complainant; vested competence;
Judgment 1192
73rd Session, 1992
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
One of the complainants "asks the Tribunal to 'admonish/censure the concerned staff officers of WHO' for a behaviour he describes and reproves. Such claims betray an utter misconception of the Tribunal's competence: suffice it to observe that the Tribunal will not declare what policies an organisation should adopt in future or hand out reprimands."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; judicial review; tribunal; vested competence;
Judgment 967
66th Session, 1989
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
"The choice of the Tribunal as the forum in cases in which it would not otherwise have jurisdiction is a term which by its very nature may not be implied but must be expressly agreed between the parties." In accordance with Article II, paragraph 4, of the Statute of the Tribunal, the organisation is correct in holding that the choice of forum must be an express term of the contract.
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 4, OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; contract; vested competence;
Judgment 646
54th Session, 1984
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Tribunal has such competence as is conferred on it by Article II of its Statute. Decisions under Article XII and the Annex [on submissions to the International Court of Justice for advisory opinion] fall outside the scope of its competence. In fact, although Article II, paragraph 7, empowers the Tribunal to rule on its own competence, its ruling is subject to the right of the governing body of an international organisation to seek review if it believes that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction or committed a fundamental error of procedure."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II, PARAGRAPH 7, AND ARTICLE XII OF THE STATUTE; ANNEX TO THE STATUTE
Keywords:
advisory opinion of icj; competence; competence of tribunal; executive body; icj; iloat statute; request by a party; vested competence;
Judgment 620
53rd Session, 1984
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"According to Article II of its Statute the Tribunal may hear complaints alleging non-observance of the official's terms of appointment or of the Staff Regulations. Having only such competence as is conferred upon it, it may not entertain matters out with the ambit of that article. It is therefore not competent to invite the FAO Council to address the International Court of Justice."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
advisory opinion of icj; competence of tribunal; executive body; icj; request by a party; vested competence;
1, 2 | next >
|
|
|
|
|