Mitigation of loss (853,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Mitigation of loss
Total judgments found: 3

• Judgment 4484

  
  133rd Session, 2022
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants challenge the decisions to reject their claim for reimbursement of deductions made as from December 2015 to a compensatory allowance following their career progression and the ensuing increase in their salary.

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  As the Committee noted, the compensatory allowance was meant to serve as a means of mitigating the adverse financial effects that the reorganisation had had on the complainants’ income in 2005 and not as a permanent financial bonus, and that moreover, ten years after the commencement of that entitlement the EPO slightly reduced the compensatory allowance, while nonetheless maintaining the complainants’ income at a stable level. In the Tribunal’s view, this reasoning is in line with the Tribunal’s analyses in Judgments 2972 and 3109, consideration 3, particularly as the complainants no longer perform shift work outside normal working hours. As the impugned decisions accepted the Appeals Committee’s reasoning on this issue, the complainants’ claims to the contrary are unfounded.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2972, 3109
  

  Keywords:

  acquired right; allowance; mitigation of loss;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4239

  
  129th Session, 2020
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment for health reasons and claims that the compensation she received for her service-incurred injury is grossly inadequate.

  Consideration 25

  Extract:

  One of its staff had been injured, as it turns out seriously, in a car accident while on a mission overseas when performing work for the Organization. WHO had an ongoing responsibility to do all it could to mitigate the effects of the accident as part of a more general obligation to protect the health and ensure the safety of its staff (see Judgment 3994, consideration 8). It is true that Dr H. asked the complainant to see her on her return and she did not. But that provides no real justification for WHO effectively doing nothing by way of further mitigating the effects of the accident. The complainant is entitled to moral damages for this breach of the duty of care.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3994
  

  Keywords:

  duty of care; injury; mitigation of loss; moral injury; service-incurred;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4139

  
  128th Session, 2019
  Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term contract as a result of her post having been abolished.

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  [I]t is an established principle that a staff member is required to limit, to the extent possible, the damage that may be caused to him by an administrative decision (see, for example, Judgment 3107, consideration 9).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3107
  

  Keywords:

  material injury; mitigation of loss;