Delegation of power (956,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Delegation of power
Total judgments found: 2

• Judgment 4809

  
  137th Session, 2024
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant seeks a contractual redefinition of his employment relationship and the setting aside of the decision not to renew his last contract.

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  The wording of th[e] letter [in question] makes it plain that it was not intended to convey a decision taken by the Executive Director but by the Director-General himself, in a procedure commonly used in such cases at the ILO and, mutatis mutandis, in many other international organisations. The matter of whether the power to sign this letter had been granted is therefore irrelevant and the plea must be dismissed in accordance with the Tribunal’s well-established case law in this matter (see, for example, Judgments 4291, considerations 17 and 18, 3352, consideration 7, and 2836, consideration 7).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2836, 3352, 4291
  

  Keywords:

  decision-maker; delegation of power; final decision; notification;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4594

  
  135th Session, 2023
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant seeks the cancellation of a competition in which she took part.

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  [T]he complainant submits that the various decisions relating to the handling of her internal complaint were taken by the Head of the Human Resources and Staff Administration Service whereas they fell within the competence of the Director General, who had not delegated his authority to the aforementioned Head.
  However, the Tribunal finds from the evidence adduced by Eurocontrol in support of its reply that:
  – by Decision No. XI/14 (2016) of 1 December 2016, the Director General had delegated power to the Director of Resources to take and sign certain decisions referred to in the provisions of the Staff Regulations, including “decisions and documents relating to the complaint process” (see the eighth indent of Article 1 of that decision);
  – under Article 2 of that same decision, the Director of Resources is authorised to transfer all or part of his delegation of signature to officials in the Directorate of Resources;
  – that Director had made use of that authority by authorising, by his Decision No. DR/II/01 (2017) of 1 September 2017, the Head of Human Resources and Staff Administration to sign documents falling under her responsibilities and for which the Director of Resources had received delegation of authority to sign according to the aforementioned Decision of the Director General of 1 December 2016.
  Since the handling of an internal complaint submitted pursuant to Article 92 of the Staff Regulations falls within the powers delegated by the Director General to the Principal Director of Resources, and since the Principal Director of Resources had sub-delegated his powers to the Head of the Human Resources and Staff Administration, the latter was indeed competent to take the various decisions relating to the handling of the complainant’s internal complaint, including the final impugned decision (see, by analogy, Judgments 3496, consideration 5, and 2495, consideration 7, and, with regard to sub-delegation of powers, Judgments 4283, consideration 4, and 3316, consideration 3). In that regard, contrary to what the complainant maintains, it is irrelevant whether or not the Head of the Human Resources and Staff Administration Service is “in the supervisory line between the complainant and the Director General”.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2495, 3316, 3496, 4283
  

  Keywords:

  delegation of power;