|
|
 |
|
|
Education expenses (341,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Education expenses
Total judgments found: 43
1, 2, 3 | next >
Judgment 4796
137th Session, 2024
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to deduct from the amount of the education allowance paid in respect of his child the remuneration received by the latter during an internship.
Considerations 3-7 & 10
Extract:
[T]his dispute essentially revolves around the interpretation of the aforementioned provisions of Article 71(9) of the Service Regulations [of the EPO].
[...]
[T]he Tribunal considers it apparent from the provision in question – even though the wording could undoubtedly be better – that the two particular kinds of allowance mentioned are not exhaustive and that allowances other than scholarships and grants, which are only referred to because they are the most common forms of educational assistance, could also give rise to such a deduction. The way in which the words “scholarships” and “grants” appear in the text, being placed in brackets and separated by a comma, rather than by a conjunction such as “or” or “and”, supports this interpretation. This is further confirmed by the fact that Article 71(9) refers to the “deduction [...] of any allowance received from other sources for the child’s education (scholarships, grants)” [...].
In addition, when called upon to rule on complaints challenging the lawfulness of Article 71 of the Service Regulations, the Tribunal stated, in Judgment 2870, consideration 12, that “[p]rovision is also made in Article 71(9) for the deduction of allowances from other sources (e.g. scholarships) payable in respect of the child’s education” [...]. While not entirely addressing the matter at hand in the present case, the wording used by the Tribunal in that sentence was already leading towards the above interpretation.
However, the Tribunal also considers that [...] internship payments made to the child of an employee during an internship carried out with an employer as part of her or his studies [...] do not constitute an allowance received for the child’s education within the meaning of Article 71(9) and cannot, therefore, be lawfully deducted from the amount of the education allowance.
The reference made in that provision to “any allowance received [...] for the child’s education” must be understood as an allowance the purpose of which is to contribute to the expenditure involved in the child’s studies, which, once again, is confirmed by the reference in the text, quoted above, to “any allowance received [...] for the child’s education” [...].
But that is not the purpose of internship payments made by employers to students or pupils carrying out an internship with them as part of their studies. Such payments are principally intended as remuneration for the services provided by the intern to the employer. Even though [...] such payments can certainly not be regarded as a salary, they are still, by their very nature, a form of remuneration made to the child, and not a contribution to the cost of her or his education.
It is true that internship payments can sometimes include a contribution from the employer towards the expenses incurred by the child or by her or his family in connection with the internship. Even on this assumption, however, that is not their essential purpose, which is still to remunerate the intern as described above, and such a contribution cannot, in any event, be regarded as a payment “for the child’s education” within the meaning of the aforementioned Article 71(9).
[...]
The aforementioned Article 71(9) does not provide, in letter or in spirit, that any allowance which derives from a source other than the Office and which could potentially be set towards those costs can be deducted from the amount of the education allowance. It only permits the deduction of those allowances the specific purpose of which is to contribute to the expenditure connected with the child’s studies, which, as already stated, is not the case with internship payments.
[...]
It follows from the[se] considerations that [...] the EPO was wrong to deduct the amount of the internship payments made to the complainant’s son from the amount of the education allowance paid to the complainant and that, in making such a deduction, the EPO breached the aforementioned provisions of Article 71 of the Service Regulations [...]
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2870
Keywords:
education expenses; interpretation; interpretation of rules;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; education expenses;
Judgment 4681
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the ICC’s decision to reject her request to pay her the education grant in respect of her son for the school year 2018-2019.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The principle of equal treatment does not guarantee that all persons receive the same benefit but, rather, requires that persons in like situations be treated alike and persons in relevantly different situations be treated differently. In the present case, the criteria for the payment of the education grant set forth in Staff Rule 103.18(d)(i) apply equally to all staff members of the ICC. Although, as pointed out by the complainant, this may result in a situation where children at approximately the same age, or even in the same classroom, may be treated differently with respect to the education grant, this is not due to any inconsistency or discrimination in the application of the criteria set forth in Staff Rule 103.18(d)(i), but to a clear and objective cut-off date established by that rule. The cut-off date distinguishes between children who turn five prior to or within the three-month window, and children who turn five outside the three-month window. Because these two categories of children are not in the same legal position, the principle of equal treatment is not violated when these two categories are treated differently.
Keywords:
allowance; education expenses; equal treatment;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; education expenses; interpretation;
Judgment 4465
133rd Session, 2022
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to cease paying boarding assistance for his son following amendments to the education grant scheme.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; complaint allowed; duty of care; education expenses; icsc decision;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The ICSC’s reasons for the proposed changes to the education grant scheme impugned in these proceedings were rational, logical and credible. They did not involve the general elimination of the benefit but its recasting with modifications of how, when and why the benefit would be paid. The adoption of the proposed changes by the IAEA was in conformity with obligations arising from membership of the UN common system. This is a valid reason for change (see Judgment 1446, consideration 14), at least in the absence of any apparent unlawfulness attending the change either procedurally or substantively.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1446
Keywords:
acquired right; education expenses; icsc decision;
Considerations 17-18
Extract:
In the present case, the complainant embarked upon the tertiary education of his son at a university in the United States of America in 2014. This was the complainant’s home country and involved travel and boarding. By the time the amendments were made to the education grant scheme, the son had completed three of the four years of his course at that university. The complainant had no real option to alter these arrangements in order to reduce the significant financial burden arising from the amendment to the scheme.
The IAEA breached its duty of care to the complainant, as that expression is currently used in the Tribunal’s case law, and the complainant is entitled to damages.
Keywords:
duty of care; education expenses;
Judgment 4120
127th Session, 2019
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to communicate to him an investigation report concerning the payment of school fees to another employee.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; education expenses; report; staff representative;
Judgment 4119
127th Session, 2019
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision of the President of the Office to amend the wording of a circular in respect of the age limit for the payment of a dependants’ allowance.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint dismissed; decision quashed; dependent child; education expenses; general decision;
Judgment 4116
127th Session, 2019
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of his request for payment of an education allowance for his children.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint dismissed; education expenses;
Judgment 3789
123rd Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of her requests for payment of an education allowance for her children.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint dismissed; education expenses;
Judgment 3781
123rd Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the EPO’s refusal to reimburse her for school fees paid in respect of two dependent children.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; dependent child; education expenses;
Judgment 3541
120th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the lower rate applied by the EPO to the retroactive payment of the lump sum education allowance for her stepchildren.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint allowed; decision quashed; education expenses;
Judgment 3523
120th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to discontinue the payment of the education allowance for her son.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint dismissed; dependent child; education expenses; permanent appointment;
Judgment 3434
119th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that the EPO had correctly concluded that the complainant was not entitled to the reimbursement he claimed for the school fees of his children.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; education expenses;
Judgment 3358
118th Session, 2014
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who has dual nationality, impugns the cessation of the payment of an education allowance on the ground that he was a national of the country in which he served.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; education expenses;
Judgment 3310
117th Session, 2014
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant asks for the recalculation of an education allowance by reference to the dependent handicapped child allowance (instead of on the basis of the dependent child allowance).
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint dismissed; dependent child; education expenses; handicapped person;
Judgment 3195
115th Session, 2013
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully impugns the decision to stop paying him the education allowance for his daughter.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
allowance; complaint dismissed; education expenses;
Judgment 3121
113th Session, 2012
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; education expenses; recovery of overpayment;
Judgment 2870
108th Session, 2010
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6, 9 and 15
Extract:
The complaints raise the question whether Article 71 of the Office's Service Regulations - which provides for the payment of an education allowance to employees who are not nationals of the country in which they are serving and, in certain limited circumstances, to nationals of that country - offends the principle of equality. The complainants contend that, at least for the purposes of post-secondary education, Article 71 proceeds by reference to an irrelevant consideration - nationality - and, if it does not, the different treatment directed by that article is neither appropriate nor adapted to the difference involved.
"[N]ationality is the primary distinction mandated by Article 71 [...]."
"In principle, the nationality of the employee is properly to be regarded as a relevant difference warranting different treatment, including with respect to post-secondary education."
"An international organisation such as the EPO, with a large workforce composed of many different nationalities, is entitled to proceed by reference to a rule applicable to all non nationals provided that the rule is appropriate and adapted to their general circumstances. And that is so even if its application in individual cases is less than perfect. Article 71 of the Service Regulations is appropriate and adapted to the general circumstances of the children of non-nationals."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Article 71 of the Service Regulations
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2313, 2638
Keywords:
allowance; difference; education expenses; equal treatment; nationality; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2638
103rd Session, 2007
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The main justification for granting benefits such as home leave or an education grant to some staff members is not that the beneficiaries have a particular nationality, but that their duty station is not in their recognised home country. Far from being discriminatory, such practices, which moreover exist in most international organisations, are designed to restore a degree of equality between officials serving in a foreign country and those who are working in a country where they normally have their home. The two categories cannot be regarded as being in identical situations. Consequently, according to firm precedent, the principle of equality must not lead to their being treated in an identical manner when a difference in treatment is appropriate and adapted (see Judgment 2313 [...])."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2313
Keywords:
allowance; breach; difference; duty station; education expenses; equal treatment; general principle; home; home leave; nationality; official; organisation's duties; place of origin; practice; purpose; rule of another organisation;
Judgment 2637
103rd Session, 2007
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"So far as concerns the education grant, the argument of discrimination against persons who are the children of international civil servants must [...] be rejected. [The Tribunal considers that] the purpose of the grant is not to confer a financial benefit but to enable a child of a staff member to be educated in the mother tongue of his or her parent and, ordinarily, that will be the language of the country with which the staff member has the closest connection."
Keywords:
allowance; breach; dependent child; education expenses; equal treatment; nationality; official; parent; place of origin; purpose;
Consideration 14
Extract:
"[I]t is convenient to note the different but related purposes of home leave and education grant. The purpose of home leave is not to confer a financial benefit or to make a monetary concession (see Judgment 937). Rather, as pointed out in Judgment 2389, it is 'to enable staff members who, owing to their work, spend a number of years away from the country with which they have the closest personal or material ties to return there in order to maintain those connections'. Similarly, the purpose of the education grant is made explicit by UN Staff Regulation 3.2(c), namely, to provide for a staff member 'serving in a country whose language is different from his or her own and who is obliged to pay tuition for the teaching of the mother tongue to a dependent child attending a local school in which the instruction is given in a language other than his or her own'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 937, 2389
Keywords:
allowance; dependent child; difference; duty station; education expenses; home leave; nationality; official; organisation's interest; payment; period; place of origin; purpose; rule of another organisation;
Consideration 22
Extract:
The complainant requests that the effective date of the administration's decision to grant her international status be changed to December 1991 instead of August 2005. "[I]t may be noted that, exceptionally, retroactive effect may be granted to a decision where the effect is favourable to a staff member (see Judgment 1130). In the present case, however, a grant of retroactivity would confer no benefit on the complainant either in relation to home leave or education grant. In the circumstances, the rule against retroactivity should be applied."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1130
Keywords:
allowance; amendment to the rules; claim; date; decision; education expenses; effect; enforcement; exception; general principle; home leave; non-local status; non-retroactivity; official; staff member's interest; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 2357
97th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"Where a person seeks to bring himself or herself within an exception to a general rule - here, the rule that an education allowance is not payable to persons serving in their own country - it is for that person to establish that he or she falls within the exception."
Keywords:
allowance; burden of proof; condition; duty station; education expenses; exception; nationality; official; written rule;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"It was said in Judgments 1835, 1836 and 1837 that the application of Article 71(2)[regarding the conditions of award of an education allowance] 'is at the discretion of the President of the Office'. It is not strictly accurate to describe a decision as to the application of Article 71(2) as discretionary. The question whether a particular school or university corresponds to a 'child's educational stage' is essentially a question of fact, albeit one that may, in some circumstances, permit of a value judgment. However, because of the nature of that question, a decision under Article 71(2) is subject to limited review on the same grounds as a discretionary decision properly so called. Thus, it will be reviewed only for procedural error, mistake of fact or law, the drawing of a clearly mistaken conclusion or misuse of authority. In particular, this Tribunal will not substitute its view of the facts for that reached by the President."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Article 71(2) of the Service Regulations for Permanent Employees of the EPO
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1835, 1836, 1837
Keywords:
abuse of power; allowance; case law; condition; decision; discretion; education expenses; enforcement; executive head; grounds; interpretation; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2016
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"As emphasised by the [organisation], the applicable interim Staff Rules provide that the education grant is calculated on the basis of expenses actually incurred. The complainant cannot therefore claim grants calculated on the hypothetical basis of the costs that would have been incurred had he remained in service."
Keywords:
allowance; application for execution; burden of proof; condition; education expenses; evidence; family allowance;
1, 2, 3 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
