Fraud (652,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Fraud
Total judgments found: 11

• Judgment 4779

  
  137th Session, 2024
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges her dismissal for misconduct.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; disciplinary procedure; fraud; remand;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4749

  
  137th Session, 2024
  International Criminal Court
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of his appointment with compensation in lieu of notice.

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  [T]he Tribunal notes that Section 2.1 of the ICC Anti-fraud Policy states that the term “fraud” means any act that knowingly attempts to mislead a party in order to obtain a financial benefit or to avoid an obligation. [...]
  Insofar as the complainant admitted to having obtained the fictitious invoices and being aware that they were intended to justify the amount missing from the relevant financial account, the Tribunal is not persuaded by the complainant’s explanation that he solely intended to assist his supervisor and not to mislead the organisation. The Registrar of the Court was undoubtedly entitled to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant intended to mislead the organisation in circumstances where the ultimate aim of the falsified invoices was precisely to justify an amount missing from the [organisation's] financial account.
  [...]
  [I]t is clear from the file that the complainant took steps to obtain and obtained the fraudulent invoices with the aim, which he must have known to be unlawful, of justifying fictitious services. The fact that the request to do so may have originated from his supervisor, as the complainant alleges, or that he may have stated to his supervisor that the invoices were falsified in no way alters the fact that the act constituted fraud as defined in Section 2.1 [...].
  

  Keywords:

  fraud; interpretation of rules;
  

  Considerations 10-11

  Extract:

  In Judgment 4478, considerations 11 and 12, the Tribunal recalled that “[t]he case law confirms that the decision on the type of disciplinary action taken remains in the discretion of the disciplinary authority, as long as the measure is not disproportionate” (see also Judgment 3640, consideration 29), and that “the Tribunal cannot substitute its evaluation for that of the disciplinary authority, [as] the Tribunal limits itself to assessing whether the decision falls within the range of acceptability” (see also on this point Judgment 3971, consideration 17). In Judgment 4478, the Tribunal further observed that, although a lack of proportionality must be seen as an error of law warranting the setting aside of a disciplinary measure, “[i]n determining whether disciplinary action is disproportionate to the offence, both objective and subjective features are to be taken into account and, in the case of dismissal, the closest scrutiny is necessary”. However, in Judgment 2699, consideration 15, the Tribunal emphasized that it will accord a high degree of deference to decisions concerning sanctions where the misconduct relates to issues of dishonesty, misrepresentation and a lack of integrity (see also on this point Judgment 4308, consideration 18).
  In the present case, the Tribunal notes that the sanction imposed on the complainant, although severe, was not the most serious disciplinary measure provided for in the ICC Staff Rules, which is summary dismissal for serious misconduct. Moreover, the aforementioned provisions specifically placed the complainant under duties of probity and honesty, and it is plain from the submissions and the evidence that his role in the Victims and Witnesses Section of the Registry of the Court in Côte d’Ivoire entailed the obligation to demonstrate irreproachable integrity and to conduct himself with the highest probity when, inter alia, providing proof of expenditure chargeable to the organisation. However, the complainant’s submission of falsified invoices that he himself had acquired for the purpose of providing proof of official expenditure directly undermined the trust essential to his continued relationship with the Organisation. The Tribunal therefore finds that, despite its severity, the sanction imposed was not disproportionate [...].

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2699, 3971, 4308, 4478
  

  Keywords:

  disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; fraud; proportionality;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  As regards the fact that the complainant had not been involved in any other incident since he joined the ICC, which could usually constitute a mitigating circumstance, it is clear from the impugned decision that the Registrar of the Court did take this into account. Similarly, the Registrar did consider the complainant’s argument that the sums involved were relatively small and that the offending conduct had not resulted in the organisation incurring any financial loss. However, these mitigating circumstances in fact carried little weight in view of the gravity of the misconduct. Moreover, even if the fact that the complainant had acted, as he submits, at his supervisor’s instigation were to be regarded as a mitigating circumstance, this would not lead to the misconduct being considered less serious.

  Keywords:

  disciplinary measure; fraud; mitigating circumstances; proportionality;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4675

  
  136th Session, 2023
  International Office of Epizootics
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant seeks the reclassification of her employment relationship and the consequential regularisation of her pension entitlements.

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  [T]he Tribunal has consistently stated that bad faith cannot be presumed and must be proven by the evidence (see, for example, Judgments 4333, consideration 15, 4161, consideration 9, 3902, consideration 11, or 2800, consideration 21). Moreover, this case law must be applied particularly rigorously where the allegation of bad faith is accompanied by an accusation of fraud (see, for example, Judgment 3407, consideration 15).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2800, 3407, 3902, 4161, 4333
  

  Keywords:

  bad faith; fraud;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4491

  
  133rd Session, 2022
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her with immediate effect for serious misconduct.

  Consideration 20

  Extract:

  [T]here has been a clear reluctance, or indeed refusal, to accept what the complainant said was true. Obviously, a person who is guilty of fraud may well often lie and contrive false facts to avoid the consequences of their fraudulent conduct. Equally obviously, an organisation must be alive to this possibility when investigating and dealing with conduct of a member of staff believed or suspected of being fraudulent. But in the present case, proof of the hypothesis that the complainant’s narrative and explanation were false and she acted fraudulently involved an unfair and distorted analysis of the facts. The Tribunal is satisfied a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the charge alleged could not properly have been made.

  Keywords:

  beyond reasonable doubt; disciplinary procedure; evidence; fraud;
  

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  The majority [of the Disciplinary Committee] expressed its finding about the conduct of the complainant. It recommended the sanction of downgrading. It observed that it was the duty of an EPO employee to disclose all facts that could possibly be relevant “for taking a correct decision about benefits allocated to [an] employee” and a failure to do so was misconduct. But this was not the misconduct charged. What was alleged against the complainant was that she had misrepresented her true status and had engaged in fraud. Fraud entails an intention to obtain financial advantage by deception (see, for example, Judgments 4238, consideration 5, and 3402, consideration 9).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3402, 4238
  

  Keywords:

  disciplinary charges; disciplinary procedure; fraud; misconduct;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4238

  
  129th Session, 2020
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to reclassify his post.

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  [T]he case law states that fraud depends on an intention to obtain financial advantage by deception (see Judgment 3402, consideration 9).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3402
  

  Keywords:

  fraud;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3964

  
  125th Session, 2018
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of dismissal for serious misconduct.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; fraud; termination of employment;
  

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  In cases of found misconduct based on allegations of fraud resulting in dismissal, the Tribunal has adopted the approach, in order to determine whether a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt could have been made, that it “will not require absolute proof, which is almost impossible to provide on such a matter [involving allegations of fraud or similar conduct]. It will dismiss the complaint if there is a set of precise and concurring presumptions of the complainant’s guilt” (Judgment 3297, consideration 8, and, also more recently, Judgment 3757, consideration 6).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3297, 3757
  

  Keywords:

  fraud; misconduct; standard of proof; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3953

  
  125th Session, 2018
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to impose upon her the disciplinary measure of downgrading and to recover from her undue payments through monthly deductions from her salary.

  Consideration 14

  Extract:

  Regarding the severity of the imposed sanction, the Tribunal recalls that, according to a long line of precedent the decision-making authority has discretion in determining the severity of a sanction to be applied to a staff member whose misconduct has been established. However, as stated in Judgment 3640, under 29 and 31, that discretion must be exercised in observance of the rule of law, particularly the principle of proportionality. In the present case, the complainant’s downgrading was not disproportionate to her misconduct. The complainant took financial advantage from the contested unlawful conduct with which she was charged and which was established. This is a serious breach of the duty of honesty incumbent on international civil servants and her state of health has no bearing on the merits of the impugned decision. In light of the above considerations, the complaint must be dismissed.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3640
  

  Keywords:

  disciplinary measure; downgrading; fraud; proportionality;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3944

  
  125th Session, 2018
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him following disciplinary proceedings.

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  The disciplinary authority within an international organisation has a discretion to choose the disciplinary measure imposed on an official for misconduct. However, its decision must always respect the principle of proportionality which applies in this area (see Judgment 3640, under 29). In this case, the Tribunal finds that the complainant engaged in repeated fraudulent practices over several months. In view of the serious nature of the acts committed by the complainant, his dismissal cannot be deemed disproportionate, notwithstanding the various factors which he puts forward for consideration. This plea will therefore be dismissed.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3640
  

  Keywords:

  disciplinary measure; fraud; proportionality;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; fraud; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3402

  
  119th Session, 2015
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The Tribunal found that the evidence established an intention to defraud on the part of the complainant and that the decision to dismiss him was not disproportionate, but it awarded damages because of the delay in the internal appeal procedure.

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  "[F]raud depends on an intention to obtain financial advantage by deception."

  Keywords:

  fraud;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; fraud; termination of employment;
  

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "[T]he complainant lodged two [Travel Expense Claims] that deliberately misstated the facts, and thereby failed to disclose the fact, that the cost of his travel [...] was effectively being paid twice by the FAO [...]. The obvious inference is that he was deliberately doing so to gain a financial benefit. This is fraud."

  Keywords:

  fraud; travel expenses;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3348

  
  118th Session, 2014
  World Meteorological Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the decision to summarily dismiss him for misconduct (fraud).

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "In his rejoinder, the complainant addresses the question of what is meant by fraud. He contends that the standard definition of fraud is: wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain; or a person or thing intended to deceive others, typically by unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities. WMO takes issue with this definition and refers to a definition of fraud from the Black’s Law Dictionary: “A knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment. Fraud is usually a tort but in some cases (especially where the conduct is wilful) it may be a crime.” In Judgment 1828, considerations 10-12, which has been cited in Judgments 1925, consideration 6, and 2038, consideration 16, fraud is treated as deception intended to result in financial gain. What is important, for present purposes, is that the charges themselves link the complainant’s conduct of manipulating the records with him obtaining a financial benefit. This involves an allegation of fraud involving deception to secure financial gain and in the remainder of these reasons, the word fraud is used with this meaning."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1828, 1925, 2038
  

  Keywords:

  definition; fraud;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3227

  
  115th Session, 2013
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose a disciplinary measure on him for having falsified his productivity figures.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; disciplinary measure; fraud;