Adoption (337,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Adoption
Total judgments found: 4

• Judgment 4250

  
  129th Session, 2020
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to grant him the requested paid parental leave upon the birth of his child by surrogacy.

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  [I]t is somewhat puzzling that in the present complaint, the complainant now submits that the inappropriate use of the adoption leave provision amounts to discrimination against him. This submission is unfounded. Having regard to the complainant’s particular situation as a primary care giver, the Administration sought to accommodate his situation with a longer period of paid leave than that provided in the paternity leave provision. Based on a broad interpretation of the complainant’s situation that he was not a biological parent of his daughter, the Administration assimilated his relationship with his daughter as one of adoption. As the ILO notes, this was the most favourable decision available in the Staff Regulations.

  Keywords:

  adoption; leave;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2389

  
  98th Session, 2005
  Universal Postal Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  The home country "is not necessarily that of the staff member's nationality. It could be the country with which he has the closest connection outside the country in which he is employed (see Judgment 1985, under 9), for instance the home country of his wife or of children whom he may have adopted or taken in but who he believes should keep up their connections with their native environment. Thus, according to Staff Rule 105.3, paragraph 4c, the Director General, in exceptional circumstances, may authorise a staff member to take home leave in a country other than the country of his nationality, provided that the latter can show that he maintained his normal residence in that other country for a prolonged period preceding his appointment, that he continues to have close family or personal ties in that country and that his taking home leave there would not be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of Staff Regulation 5.3."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: UPU Staff Regulation 5.3 and Staff Rule 105.3, paragraph 4c
  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1985
  

  Keywords:

  adoption; appointment; burden of proof; condition; definition; dependent child; difference; duty station; exception; executive head; family relationship; home leave; nationality; official travel; period; place of origin; residence; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 952

  
  66th Session, 1989
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 4-5

  Extract:

  "The burden is on the complainant to satisfy the organization that the adoption was lawful, and he has failed to discharge it. [...] The complainant has not met the further requirement that he must satisfy the organization that at the date of the adoption the parents of his grandson were deceased or permanently incapacitated and unemployable."

  Keywords:

  adoption; burden of proof; complainant; condition; death; evidence; invalidity; parent;
  

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  WHO Manual provision II.2.430.2 was amended so as to restrict the possibility of having adopted blood relatives treated as dependants. The complainant submits that the amendment infringed an acquired right. The Tribunal held that "the right which the amendment removed cannot be deemed to have constituted any essential part of the complainant's terms of appointment, and the allegation of breach of an acquired right is therefore unsound."

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: WHO MANUAL PROVISION II.2.430.2
  
  

  Keywords:

  acquired right; adoption; amendment to the rules; dependant; dependent child; family relationship; provision; staff regulations and rules;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 292

  
  38th Session, 1977
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 15

  Extract:

  "If it is to be granted that the power to make a rule must embrace a power to amend it, then the Director-General could unilaterally amend Rule No. 7, but only by the exercise of his rule-making power. There is no document in the dossier [which explicitly shows him to have exercised] such a power."

  Keywords:

  adoption; amendment to the rules; competence; decision-maker; executive head; provision; staff regulations and rules;