|
|
 |
|
|
Privileges and immunities (485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 670,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Privileges and immunities
Total judgments found: 25
1, 2 | next >
Judgment 3573
121st Session, 2016
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: After taking early retirement, the complainant refused to return his special identity card and the special registration plates of his vehicle.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; early retirement; privileges and immunities; right;
Judgment 3440
119th Session, 2015
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision to terminate her appointment for unsatisfactory performance at the end of her probationary period.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; non-renewal of contract; privileges and immunities;
Judgment 3432
119th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant alleges that the EPO breached its duty of care towards him and successfully impugns the decision to award him a compensation which he considers inadequate.
Consideration 11
Extract:
[T]he EPO should not have simply given effect to the approach of the Dutch authorities in relation to the rights of individuals who were both EPO employees and Dutch nationals. As just noted, it was highly arguable that the approach of the Dutch authorities was wrong. Accordingly, the EPO breached its duty of care to the complainant in simply advising him to follow the IND process, which plainly involved a bureaucratic pathway that was considerably less straightforward than the issuance of an identity card. The EPO should not have given this advice without having first, on the complainant’s behalf at least, pressed the Dutch authorities to issue his children with identity cards and to have done so by reference to the 1977 Seat Agreement.
Keywords:
duty of care; headquarters agreement; privileges and immunities;
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"[T]he nature of a privilege is such that it may be suspended or withdrawn as an interim measure to prevent abuse even if there is no specific provision to that effect in the relevant rules."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 2751
105th Session, 2008
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The intention with which a statement is made is not necessarily determinative of the question whether a statement that is wholly irrelevant is also one that can serve no proper purpose." The complainant represented three colleagues whose complaints were considered by the Tribunal in Judgment 2514. In its replies the Organisation had stated that, by reason of the time he had spent providing legal assistance to staff members, the complainant's work as an examiner had been less satisfactory than it should have been. "That was defamatory. It was also inconsistent with the duty of the EPO to respect the complainant's dignity. In the context of the other comments that were within the limits of the privilege that attaches to proceedings before the Tribunal, it carried the threat of possible administrative consequences for the complainant's employment. Such a remark can serve no proper purpose. Accordingly, it was not privileged and the complainant is entitled to seek relief with respect to it."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2514
Keywords:
breach; compensation; consequence; counsel; iloat; intention of parties; organisation; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; procedure before the tribunal; purpose; request by a party; respect for dignity; right; security of tenure; staff representative;
Considerations 3 and 6
Extract:
"Statements made in legal proceedings are privileged, whether those statements are made in writing in the pleadings or orally in the course of a hearing. The consequence is that, even if defamatory, they cannot be the subject of legal proceedings or sanction. The privilege, sometimes referred to as 'in court privilege', exists, not for the benefit of the parties or their representatives, but because it is necessary for the proper determination of proceedings and the issues that arise in their course. In Judgment 1391 the Tribunal recognised that the privilege attaches to its proceedings, as well as those of internal appeal bodies. [...]
[T]he Tribunal's consideration of the extent of the privilege that attaches to statements made in the course of internal appeal proceedings or proceedings before the Tribunal has concentrated on statements made by staff members. However, the privilege is the same in the case of statements made by or on behalf of defendant organisations, and they must be allowed a similar degree of freedom in what they say and the manner of its expression. Even so, a statement will constitute a perversion of a defendant organisation's right of reply if it is wholly irrelevant and it can only serve an improper purpose."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1391
Keywords:
abuse of power; breach; confidential evidence; consequence; disciplinary measure; formal requirements; freedom of speech; iloat; internal appeals body; judicial review; language; misuse of authority; official; oral proceedings; organisation; privileges and immunities; procedure before the tribunal; purpose; reply; respect for dignity; right; settlement out of court;
Judgment 2730
105th Session, 2008
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"[A]nyone filing a complaint with the Tribunal must state in his brief the facts of the case and the pleas raised against the impugned decision (Article 6, paragraph 1(b) of the Rules of the Tribunal). He should do so by putting forward arguments that can reasonably be considered to support his case. At all events, the immunity that the complainant enjoys in respect of his litigation does not exempt him from the duty to refrain from violating the respect that any litigant owes to the opposing parties. The Tribunal does not have to tolerate the initiation of proceedings before it that are manifestly frivolous, wrongful or vexatious."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: Article 6, paragraph 1(b), of the Rules
Keywords:
complainant; complaint; decision; grounds; iloat statute; limits; privileges and immunities; procedure before the tribunal; staff member's duties; vexatious complaint;
Judgment 2503
100th Session, 2006
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant was assigned to the Organisation by temporary employment agencies. "The fact that Eurocontrol relied on its immunity from jurisdiction and on the Tribunal's competence to hear disputes between the Agency and its staff in order to challenge the jurisdiction of the conseil de prud'hommes, cannot deprive it of its right to request that the Tribunal decline jurisdiction in accordance with its Statute."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; iloat statute; municipal court; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; receivability of the complaint; right;
Judgment 2296
96th Session, 2004
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[T]he right of an international civil servant to recover from his employer the taxes which he has been forced to pay on his tax-exempt income cannot be made contingent upon the employer's right to recover those amounts from the national government concerned."
Keywords:
condition; member state; official; organisation; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; right; tax;
Judgment 2257
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The principle of tax exemption does not apply to former staff members."
Keywords:
pension; privileges and immunities; retirement; tax;
Judgment 2256
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 14-16
Extract:
"With regard to the role of a tax reimbursement agreement, the Tribunal stated the following [in judgment 2032]: "It would be strange indeed if the absence of [a tax reimbursement agreement (TRA)] could be invoked by an international organisation or its member states to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. If a member state in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that state."[T]he evident corollary of that statement is that it would similarly be strange if the existence of an agreement could be invoked by an international organisation to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. Such an agreement is meant to set the terms of a member state's commitment to refund an organisation for tax reimbursements. It must, however, conform with international law and cannot be used to undermine the fundamental principles of tax exemption recalled by the Tribunal. Thus, even if the text of the TRA had the reach which the organisation contends for it, which may be doubted, it would simply be unenforceable as being contrary to law. [...] It is likewise with the provisions of the Staff Regulations which, in the organisation's submissions, would limit the complainant's right to tax reimbursement to the amounts actually paid to the organisation by the United States under the TRA. Like the TRA itself, the Staff Regulations must be in conformity with the requirements of the law and where they are not, they are simply unenforceable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2032
Keywords:
equal treatment; international civil service principles; member state; no provision; privileges and immunities; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 2222
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
"The decisive factor behind the request for the complainant's diplomatic immunity to be waived [...] was not brought to the complainant's knowledge. That might have given him a chance to identify his accusers and, if need be, armed with that knowledge, to explain to his hierarchical superiors the reasons for the serious charges brought against him, before the decision was taken to waive his diplomatic immunity [...] by virtue of the right to information recognised by the tribunal's case law, particularly Judgment 1756, the organization, which held information that was so important to the complainant, had an obligation to bring it to his knowledge. It may be concluded from the above that the organization violated the complainant's right to be informed and injured his dignity and reputation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1756
Keywords:
breach; case law; complainant; consequence; decision; duty to inform; elements; judgment of the tribunal; moral injury; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; request by a party; respect for dignity; right; right to reply; supervisor; waiver of immunity;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Referring to the Tribunal's case law, in particular Judgments 70 and 1543, the defendant submits that the Tribunal's competence, ratione materiae, does not extend to disputes regarding the Director-General's discretion to waive diplomatic immunity. It is worth noting that the complainant does not in fact [...] challenge the decision to waive his diplomatic immunity in itself. He rather challenges the circumstances in which that decision was taken, which in his view violated his contractual rights or those arising from the general principles of law which should be observed by international organisations. Since the case law referred to by the defendant does not apply, the Tribunal is of the view that only a consideration of the merits of the case may show whether the complainant's allegations are well founded."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 70, 1543
Keywords:
breach; case law; competence of tribunal; complainant; condition; decision; discretion; executive head; general principle; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; judicial review; organisation; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; rebuttal; receivability of the complaint; right; terms of appointment; waiver of immunity;
Judgment 2190
94th Session, 2003
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The organization has a discretion to assess, in the context of its relations with a Member State, which are beyond the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether it is appropriate to lift the immunity from legal process of its employees (see in this respect Judgments 933 and 1543)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 933, 1543
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; discretion; judicial review; member state; organisation; privileges and immunities; tribunal; waiver of immunity;
Judgment 2178
94th Session, 2003
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
In its judgment on the complainant's first complaint the Tribunal ordered that he be compensated because he had been wrongfully terminated. In his application for review of that judgment "the complainant seeks compensation in respect of the loss of the tax immunities he enjoyed by virtue of the agreement between the [...] authorities [of the host country] and the [organisation]. Since the complainant has not been reinstated in his post, he is no longer entitled to those immunities. Nor is he entitled to compensation for the loss thereof: the tax regime governing the exemptions he may claim is solely a matter for the competent authorities of the host state, and the [organisation] cannot be held liable for direct or indirect taxes owed by the complainant."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2090
Keywords:
allowance; application for execution; domestic law; headquarters agreement; judgment of the tribunal; privileges and immunities; reconstruction of career; reinstatement; request by a party; tax;
Judgment 2032
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Exemption from national taxes is an essential condition of employment in the international civil service and is an important guarantee of independence and objectivity. It cannot be made to depend upon the whim of national taxing authorities [...]."
Keywords:
independence; member state; official; privileges and immunities; safeguard; salary; tax;
Consideration 14
Extract:
"Where a State imposes tax upon its nationals who are international civil servants in receipt of income some of which is tax exempt and some of which is not the only proper method of determining how much tax should actually be paid is to calculate the hypothetical amount which would be due if the exempt income had not been received."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; reckoning; salary; tax;
Consideration 15
Extract:
"If a Member State in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that State."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"One of the purposes of staff assessment is surely to put the organisation in funds to protect its employees against States which refuse to recognise their tax-exempt status."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; purpose; refund; refusal; salary; staff assessment; tax;
Consideration 17
Extract:
"If the organisation does not [...] contest the exempt status of the complainant, it is its duty to protect him against the claims of the authorities of a Member State, to reimburse him the amount of tax he has paid to the State, and to employ its own considerable power, authority and influence to have the [...] authorities [of that state] change their position. [...] By requiring him to appeal against his [...] tax assessment while conceding the tax-exempt status of his [...] income the organisation has failed in its duty to the complainant."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Judgment 1661
83rd Session, 1997
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6(a)
Extract:
"Time and again the complainant broke customs regulations to the detriment of the host State under cover of privileges that the Organization is granted in order to carry out its mandate. His conduct was such as to undermine the trust it must enjoy and to compromise the attainment of its objectives. That there was misconduct is indeed beyond gainsaying, especially in someone of his position who went on breaking the rules even after a warning in 1975."
Keywords:
organisation; organisation's interest; privileges and immunities; serious misconduct; warning;
Judgment 1543
81st Session, 1996
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"The Administrative Council exercised its discretion under Article 19(2) [of the EPO's Protocol on Privileges and Immunities] in declining to waive the President's immunity from jurisdiction. Such exercise of discretion is a matter outside the Tribunal's competence, affecting as it does relations between the defendant organisation and a member State. The complaint is therefore 'clearly irreceivable' and must be summarily dismissed in accordance with Article 7 of the Tribunal's Rules."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE 7 OF THE RULES
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 19(2) OF THE EPO PROTOCOL ON PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; complaint; discretion; executive head; iloat statute; judicial review; member state; organisation; privileges and immunities; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; summary procedure; waiver of immunity;
Judgment 1491
80th Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"CERN has but one obligation under R IV 2.02: to refund taxes paid by officials 'on remuneration and benefits received from the organization'. [...] CERN is not to blame for the resulting increase in the rates of taxation of the complainants' total income. All it can do is pay back to French citizens on its staff the amounts they have paid in tax on their international earnings: it exerts control neither over the tax brackets and rates set by French law, nor over the method of reckoning their total income, which is just a feature of the French manner of processing income tax."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF REGULATION R IV 2.02
Keywords:
domestic law; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; rate; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The rule against discrimination "holds good only where staff who are in like case both in law and in fact have not been treated alike. Under CERN's agreement with France its staff are exempt in that country from direct taxation on their earnings from the organization. But the provision does not apply to French citizens, who do not enjoy exemption from tax on their earnings from CERN and are therefore, by reason of the terms of an agreement that CERN is bound by, not in the same position in law as staff of other nationalities."
Keywords:
domestic law; equal treatment; general principle; nationality; privileges and immunities; tax;
Judgment 1292
75th Session, 1993
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"When the Director-General asks the Swiss government to confer diplomatic status, he is exercising his discretion. [...] So the Tribunal will not interfere with his decision unless he has committed some procedural or formal error or a mistake of law or of fact, or applied some wrong principle, or drawn illogical conclusions from the evidence before him."
Keywords:
discretion; executive head; flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; privileges and immunities; procedural flaw; status of complainant;
Judgment 1182
73rd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Under Articles R IV 2.01 and 2.02 of CERN's Staff Regulations staff members must comply with national tax law. CERN, however, refunds any direct taxation on pay upon receiving proof of payment. The complainant, a Frenchman, met his obligations toward his home country. Owing to a peculiar feature of French tax law, part of the amount he had paid did not appear on the supporting documents which he had submitted to CERN with his claim for refund. The organization's decision must be set aside because it is at odds with the principle "that all the staff of an organisation shall enjoy equal treatment".
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R IV 2.01 OF THE CERN STAFF REGULATIONS;
ARTICLE R IV 2.02 OF THE CERN STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
equal treatment; privileges and immunities; refund; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 1001
68th Session, 1990
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainants, who are employed by UNIDO in the general service category, seek the quashing of decisions setting their pay according to the new salary scales brought in as from 1 October 1987. They are objecting to the flat 2.4 per cent salary cut included in scales drawn up on the basis of an International Civil Service Commission recommendation to account for the so-called "commissary benefit". UNIDO Staff Regulation 6.5(a) says that the pay of staff in the general service category shall be based on "the best prevailing conditions of employment in the locality" (Flemming principle). The Tribunal holds that for the purpose of establishing parity with local pay the only relevant items are the ones defined in the Staff Regulations and financial rules of the organisation and paid out of its own funds. It follows that such a benefit as access to the commissary, which is provided for neither in the Staff Regulations nor in the financial rules and is a form of tax relief bestowed by the host country at no cost to the Organisation, may not count in a comparison of this nature. The Organization's decision to reduce salaries is unlawful and cannot stand. The cases are sent back to UNIDO for the recalculation of their pay.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNIDO STAFF REGULATION 6.5(A)
Keywords:
elements; enforcement; flaw; flemming principle; fringe benefits; general service category; headquarters agreement; icsc decision; privileges and immunities; reckoning; reduction of salary; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules;
1, 2 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
