|
|
 |
|
|
Withdrawal of decision (44,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Withdrawal of decision
Total judgments found: 25
1, 2 | next >
Judgment 4698
136th Session, 2023
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks reinstatement in a post to which he had been appointed and requests payment of the corresponding function allowance.
Consideration 6
Extract:
Since the Staff Regulations do not contain any specific provisions governing the conditions for the reversal – as is the case here – or the revocation of administrative decisions, this question can be settled only by referring to the general principles of law applied by the Tribunal. In accordance with these principles, an individual decision conferring an advantage on an official becomes binding on the organisation which has taken it and thus creates rights for the person concerned as soon as it has been notified to her or him in the manner prescribed by the applicable rules (see, for example, Judgments 3693, consideration 17, 3483, consideration 4, 2906, considerations 7 and 8, 2201, consideration 4, and 2112, consideration 7(a)). Where there is no express provision to this effect, as a general rule, such a decision may therefore only be overturned, whether by revocation or reversal, if two conditions are satisfied: the decision must be unlawful and it must not yet have become final (see, inter alia, Judgments 1006, consideration 2, and 994, consideration 14).
The position is different only where the initial decision stemmed from a purely factual error and where its revocation, or reversal, does not result in a breach of the requirements of the principle of good faith (see, in this respect, Judgments 3693, consideration 18, 3483, consideration 6, and 2906, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 994, 1006, 2112, 2201, 2906, 3483, 3693
Keywords:
material error; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; complaint allowed; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 4256
129th Session, 2020
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge decisions taken by the President of the Office following a recommendation of the Internal Appeals Committee.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; withdrawal of decision;
Consideration 8
Extract:
As a result of the withdrawal of the impugned decisions, the Tribunal can only conclude that the complaints are now without object. The legal foundation for the complainants’ claims no longer exists, and their complaints must therefore be dismissed in their entirety.
Keywords:
withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 4255
129th Session, 2020
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge various decisions adopted by the Administrative Council of the EPO.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 3942
125th Session, 2018
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to reinstate her in her former position.
Considerations 8 and 9
Extract:
The Tribunal accepts [...] that the executive head of an organisation has a discretionary power to review an earlier decision and can, for good reason and acting bone fide, vary or rescind that decision (see, for example, Judgment 618, consideration 5, though compare Judgment 3871, consideration 3), unless the earlier decision is immune from revision either because of the effect of normative legal documents within the organisation such as staff rules or regulations, or because of the application of principles found in the Tribunal’s case law such as promissory estoppel (see, for example, Judgment 1781, considerations 12 to 14). But the rationale for the reversal decision, in the present case, does not withstand close scrutiny. [...]
It is true that the remedy chosen in the decision [...] certainly compensated the complainant, financially, for the direct effect of the unlawful non-renewal of her contract as an act of retaliation. However, that decision fails to recognise that bare financial compensation for lost income arising directly from non-renewal of the complainant’s contract for an unlawful reason might be an insufficient remedy. This failure is an error of law involving a failure to take into account relevant considerations.
Keywords:
estoppel; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 3198
115th Session, 2013
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the withdrawal from his personal file of the warnings concerning his productivity.
Consideration 25
Extract:
"According to the case law of the Tribunal, no damages will be ordered where a decision does not hamper a career and the matter which was complained of has been withdrawn (see Judgment 1380, under 11)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1380
Keywords:
decision; evidence; lack of evidence; lack of injury; material damages; moral injury; no cause of action; professional injury; withdrawal of decision;
Consideration 22
Extract:
"[A] cause of action no longer exists when the action that is complained of is withdrawn. Thus, the Tribunal stated as follows in Judgment 1394, under 4, in which the EPO was the defendant: “At the date of filing […] the decision [the complainant] is impugning did indisputably cause [him] injury and he was free to challenge it as he saw fit. Yet, though his claim to quashing did then serve some purpose it no longer does so since at his own instance the decision has been withdrawn. There is of course no question of quashing a decision that no longer exists and therefore has no effect in law. So the claim to the quashing of the decision must fail.”"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1394
Keywords:
cause of action; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 3021
111th Session, 2011
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
Suspension of Commissary privileges.
"[T]he nature of a privilege is such that it may be suspended or withdrawn as an interim measure to prevent abuse even if there is no specific provision to that effect in the relevant rules."
Keywords:
no provision; privileges and immunities; provisional decision; staff regulations and rules; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 2906
108th Session, 2010
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"In accordance with these principles, an individual decision affecting an official becomes binding on the organisation which has taken it and thus creates rights for the person concerned as soon as it has been notified to him or her in the manner prescribed by the applicable rules (see, for example, Judgments 2112, under 7(a), and 2201, under 4). As a general rule, such a decision may therefore be reversed only if two conditions are satisfied: the decision must be unlawful and it must not yet have become final (see Judgments 994, under 14, or 1006, under 2). Furthermore, where an individual decision does not create rights, provided that the principle of good faith is respected, it may be reversed at any time (see Judgment 587, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 587, 994, 1006, 2112, 2201
Keywords:
applicable law; binding character; condition; decision; good faith; individual decision; promotion; repeal; right; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 2637
103rd Session, 2007
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
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 1927
88th Session, 2000
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"While the complaint may seem to show no cause of action, since the decision to suspend him has been revoked, the measure did have material - although not financial - and particularly moral consequences during the period for which it was in effect. Certain of the complainant's duties were withdrawn, although he continued to receive full pay. In these conditions, the complaint does still show cause for action [...]."
Keywords:
cause of action; consequence; decision; injury; material injury; moral injury; receivability of the complaint; suspension; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1811
86th Session, 1999
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant asked that his interim report be struck from his personal file on the grounds that it had prompted the refusal of his within-grade step increment. "It stands to reason that the complainant's file should contain any papers lawfully made out and bearing on his services with the organization, save medical reports. [H]is claim to removal of the interim review from his file must fail: there was nothing unlawful about that text and it was in any event superseded by the final appraisal, which was good."
Keywords:
career; complainant; exception; medical records; performance report; personal file; withdrawal of decision; work appraisal;
Judgment 1788
86th Session, 1999
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Having won satisfaction only after filing suit, the complainant is entitled to costs in the amount he claims: 5,000 Swiss francs."
Keywords:
costs; late decision; tribunal; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1680
84th Session, 1998
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Organization "cites the ruling in Judgment 1394 [...] that there is no question of 'quashing a decision that no longer exists and therefore has no effect in law'. But the precedent holds good only where the decision impugned has been retroactively withdrawn and has had no effect in law."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1394
Keywords:
cause of action; claim moot; effect; impugned decision; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1601
82nd Session, 1997
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Since the reversal of the disputed measures came only after the filing of the complaints and the complainants were therefore put to needless expense, their claim to costs succeeds. Eurocontrol's counterclaim to an award of costs against the complainants is dismissed."
Keywords:
complaint; costs; counterclaim; date; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1431
79th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The impugned decision having been withdrawn and declared null and void by its author, "whatever his reasons for doing so may have been, the only possible inference is [...] that the complainant has no cause of action and his complaint is therefore irreceivable." The Tribunal need not rule on the substantive question he raises in the absence of any substantive dispute between the parties.
Keywords:
cause of action; competence of tribunal; complaint; decision; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1394
78th Session, 1995
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"At the date of filing [...] the decision [the complainant] is impugning did indisputably cause him injury and he was free to challenge it as he saw fit. Yet, though his claim to quashing did then serve some purpose it no longer does so since at his own instance the decision has been withdrawn. There is of course no question of quashing a decision that no longer exists and therefore has no effect in law. So the claim to the quashing of the decision must fail."
Keywords:
application for quashing; cause of action; complaint; decision; no cause of action; receivability of the complaint; withdrawal of decision;
Consideration 6
Extract:
Since the complaint succeeds in part and the reason why the Tribunal is declining to rule on the impugned decision is that it has been withdrawn, the complainant is entitled to costs.
Keywords:
amount; costs; decision; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1130
71st Session, 1991
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The Organisation granted the complainants incremental steps on a provisional basis while awaiting for new salary scales to come into force. The Tribunal holds that "there was nothing unlawful about replacing them several months later with retroactive decisions granting them lower steps."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; increment; provisional decision; reduction of salary; salary; scale; step; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1111
71st Session, 1991
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
An earlier decision had informed the complainant that she would not qualify for a termination indemnity if she refused to move to Lyons when the organization moved there. However, a later decision granted her the indemnity. The Tribunal observes that "the very inconsistency between the two decisions shows that the later one, which had no basis in law, was a mistake." Since the decision was materially wrong Interpol was entitled under Article 30 of the Staff Regulations to claim payment back from her.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 30 OF THE INTERPOL STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
recovery of overpayment; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1020
69th Session, 1990
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"The general principle the Tribunal will apply is that, save where there is reversal of an earlier decision - and in this case there was not - an administrative decision may not retroactively impair a right or alter any state of fact."
Keywords:
exception; general principle; non-retroactivity; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1019
69th Session, 1990
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
Vide Judgment 1020, consideration 12.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1020
Keywords:
exception; general principle; non-retroactivity; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 1006
68th Session, 1990
World Tourism Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
In 1988 the Secretary-General decided to reverse a decision which the then Secretary-General took in 1979 to grant the complainant non-local status. The reason for the reversal was that the original decision had not been warranted. The Tribunal holds that "even if that decision was based on facts that were wrong and even if there was misinterpretation of Regulation 16 [now Staff Rule 14.6 on how to determine an official's home], it was in any event too late by 1988 to reverse a decision that the organization had already abided by for almost nine years." The impugned decision is quashed.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: RULE 14.6 OF THE WTO STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
flaw; local status; non-local status; time limit; withdrawal of decision;
1, 2 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
