Acquired right (182,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Acquired right
Total judgments found: 136
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
Judgment 5185
141st Session, 2026
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a Board of Appeal member, challenges his transposition to a new grade with effect from 1 July 2015 as a result of the introduction of a new career system.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[L]e Tribunal a estimé que, dès lors que les agents en cause disposaient tout de même de certaines potentialités de progression de carrière, du fait qu’ils pouvaient accéder à des postes de débouché, et bénéficiaient d’augmentations de traitement, cette situation ne caractérisait pas une violation de leurs droits acquis. Il a en effet considéré que le sort réservé à ces agents dans le nouveau système de carrière relevait d’un «équilibre raisonnable qui ne modifiait pas [leurs] conditions d’emploi essentielles» (voir les jugements 5070, au considérant 8, 5069, au considérant 10, et 4990, au considérant 3).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4990, 5069, 5070
Keywords:
acquired right; career;
Judgment 5180
141st Session, 2026
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the EPO’s invalidity reforms.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; invalidity;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"In Judgment 832, consideration 14, the Tribunal established that the assessment whether an amendment to the terms of employment infringes acquired rights, depends upon: (1) the nature of the term that is altered; (2) the reason for the change; and (3) the consequences of allowing or disallowing an acquired right […]. It is within an organization’s discretion to amend its staff regulations. […] In accepting this, however, the Tribunal stresses that the EPO should strike a balance between the mutual obligations of the Organisation and its employees and the main or fundamental conditions of its employees’ appointment […].
The interest of current and future employees who are not currently affected by the rule but shall be in the future is also to be taken into account by the Organisation. The question of the sustainability of pension schemes must be a primary concern to the Organisation and as such may naturally require adjustments to be made to the norm regulating pension schemes over time […]. By its nature as a remote and contingent right, the benefit to an invalidity pension arises only under conditions of invalidity to cover a risk that rarely occurs. This is not a fundamental term which could be said to have reasonably induced the complainant or any staff member of the EPO to enter into the contract of employment with the Organisation so as to preclude the Organisation from altering its terms as it did by the new arrangements […]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 832
Keywords:
acquired right; invalidity;
Judgment 5169
141st Session, 2026
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reduce her “travelling expenses” pursuant to Office Notice No. 18/20 of 24 July 2020.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; complaint allowed; motivation of final decision; travel expenses;
Consideration 15
Extract:
Le Tribunal rappelle que, selon sa jurisprudence constante, la modification au détriment d’un fonctionnaire d’une disposition régissant sa situation ne constitue une violation d’un droit acquis que si elle bouleverse l’économie de son contrat d’engagement ou porte atteinte à une condition d’emploi fondamentale qui a été de nature à déterminer l’intéressé à entrer – ou, ultérieurement, à rester – en service. Pour qu’il y ait matière à éventuelle méconnaissance d’un droit acquis, il faut donc que la modification apportée au texte applicable porte sur une condition d’emploi présentant un caractère fondamental et essentiel (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4593, au considérant 10, 4398, au considérant 10, 4381, aux considérants 13 et 14, et 3074, au considérant 16, ainsi que la jurisprudence citée dans ces jugements). Le Tribunal ajoute que, dans le jugement 2972, au considérant 8, il a aussi été dit «[...] qu’un fonctionnaire n’a “pas de droit acquis pour ce qui est du montant effectif et du maintien du mode de calcul [d’une] indemnité. Au contraire, l’intéressé doit s’attendre aux modifications que les circonstances pourraient rendre nécessaires”» (voir également, à ce sujet, les jugements 666, au considérant 5, et 391, au considérant 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 391, 666, 2972, 3074, 4381, 4398, 4593
Keywords:
acquired right; terms of appointment;
Consideration 17
Extract:
Le Tribunal relève […] que, selon une jurisprudence constante reprise notamment dans le jugement 4028, au considérant 13, il est reconnu que «les fonctionnaires des organisations internationales n’ont nullement droit à se voir appliquer, tout au long de leur carrière et pendant leur retraite, l’ensemble des conditions d’emploi ou de retraite prévues par les dispositions statutaires ou réglementaires en vigueur à la date de leur recrutement. Ces conditions peuvent, pour la plupart, être modifiées, au cours de la relation d’emploi ou postérieurement, par l’effet d’amendements apportés à ces dispositions (voir aussi le jugement 3876, au considérant 7).»
Or, ainsi que le souligne à juste titre Eurocontrol dans ses écritures, les frais de voyage constituent un élément accessoire à la rémunération de la requérante et ne sont qu’un remboursement de frais dont les conditions sont fixées par un règlement d’application du Directeur général, qui peut en modifier les modalités. Ce remboursement fait partie des avantages qui restent en constante évolution au vu de la situation économique et dont le personnel ne peut légitimement s’attendre à ce qu’ils restent inchangés tout au long de leur carrière.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3876, 4028
Keywords:
acquired right; terms of appointment; travel expenses;
Judgment 5165
141st Session, 2026
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to withdraw her “travelling expenses” pursuant to Office Notice No. 18/20 of 24 July 2020.
Considerations 11-13
Extract:
Le Tribunal rappelle que, selon sa jurisprudence constante, la modification au détriment d’un fonctionnaire d’une disposition régissant sa situation ne constitue une violation d’un droit acquis que si elle bouleverse l’économie de son contrat d’engagement ou porte atteinte à une condition d’emploi fondamentale qui a été de nature à déterminer l’intéressé à entrer – ou, ultérieurement, à rester – en service. Pour qu’il y ait matière à éventuelle méconnaissance d’un droit acquis, il faut donc que la modification apportée au texte applicable porte sur une condition d’emploi présentant un caractère fondamental et essentiel (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4593, au considérant 10, 4398, au considérant 10, 4381, aux considérants 13 et 14, et 3074, au considérant 16, ainsi que la jurisprudence citée dans ces jugements).
[…]
Le Tribunal relève ensuite que, selon une jurisprudence constante reprise notamment dans le jugement 4028, au considérant 13, il est reconnu que «les fonctionnaires des organisations internationales n’ont nullement droit à se voir appliquer, tout au long de leur carrière et pendant leur retraite, l’ensemble des conditions d’emploi ou de retraite prévues par les dispositions statutaires ou réglementaires en vigueur à la date de leur recrutement. Ces conditions peuvent, pour la plupart, être modifiées, au cours de la relation d’emploi ou postérieurement, par l’effet d’amendements apportés à ces dispositions (voir aussi le jugement 3876, au considérant 7).»
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3074, 3876, 4381, 4398, 4593
Keywords:
acquired right; terms of appointment;
Judgment 5164
141st Session, 2026
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to withdraw his “travelling expenses” pursuant to Office Notice No. 18/20 of 24 July 2020.
Considerations 14-16
Extract:
Le Tribunal rappelle que, selon sa jurisprudence constante, la modification au détriment d’un fonctionnaire d’une disposition régissant sa situation ne constitue une violation d’un droit acquis que si elle bouleverse l’économie de son contrat d’engagement ou porte atteinte à une condition d’emploi fondamentale qui a été de nature à déterminer l’intéressé à entrer – ou, ultérieurement, à rester – en service. Pour qu’il y ait matière à éventuelle méconnaissance d’un droit acquis, il faut donc que la modification apportée au texte applicable porte sur une condition d’emploi présentant un caractère fondamental et essentiel (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4593, au considérant 10, 4398, au considérant 10, 4381, aux considérants 13 et 14, et 3074, au considérant 16, ainsi que la jurisprudence citée dans ces jugements).
[…]
Le Tribunal relève ensuite que, selon une jurisprudence constante reprise notamment dans le jugement 4028, au considérant 13, il est reconnu que «les fonctionnaires des organisations internationales n’ont nullement droit à se voir appliquer, tout au long de leur carrière et pendant leur retraite, l’ensemble des conditions d’emploi ou de retraite prévues par les dispositions statutaires ou réglementaires en vigueur à la date de leur recrutement. Ces conditions peuvent, pour la plupart, être modifiées, au cours de la relation d’emploi ou postérieurement, par l’effet d’amendements apportés à ces dispositions (voir aussi le jugement 3876, au considérant 7).»
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3074, 3876, 4028, 4381, 4398, 4593
Keywords:
acquired right; terms of appointment;
Judgment 5097
141st Session, 2026
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of a letter of warning.
Consideration 5
Extract:
"According to the Tribunal’s case law, when addressing a claim, an administrative authority must generally base itself on the provisions in force at the time it takes its decision, and not on those in force at the time the claim was submitted. Only where this approach is clearly excluded by the new provisions, or where it would result in a breach of the requirements of good faith, non-retroactivity of administrative decisions and protection of acquired rights, the above rule will not apply […].
In the present case, in its recommendations, the [internal appeals body] stated that the complainant’s misconduct had to be assessed under the rules in force at the time it occurred […].
[….] The Tribunal concurs with this reasoning insofar as it concerns the assessment of misconduct, the disciplinary measure, and its further consequence, i.e. the recording of the disciplinary decision in the personal file. Indeed, a general principle concerning disciplinary measures is that the applicable rules are those in force at the time the misconduct occurred, unless new rules are more favourable to the perpetrator, in which case the new rules apply.
However, regarding the statutory rules concerning the conduct of the disciplinary proceedings and internal appeals, the Tribunal maintains, in light of its case law, that the applicable rules were those in force when the proceedings were carried out and the related decisions were issued."
Keywords:
acquired right; applicable law; decision; exception; general principle; good faith; non-retroactivity;
Judgment 5082
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the increase in employees’ contribution rate to the healthcare insurance scheme.
Considerations 5-6
Extract:
The Tribunal has held that international civil servants are not entitled to have all the conditions of employment or retirement laid down in the provisions of the staff rules and regulations in force at the time of their recruitment applied to them throughout their career and retirement. Most of those conditions can be altered though depending on the nature and importance of the provision in question, staff may have an acquired right to their continued application. For there to be a breach of an acquired right, the amendment to the applicable text must relate to a fundamental and essential term of employment (see, for example, Judgments 4711, consideration 8, 4028, consideration 13, and Judgments 3909, 3135, 2986, 2682, and 2089).
Judgment 832, consideration 14, details a three-part test for determining whether the altered term is fundamental and essential. The test is as follows:
(i) The nature of the altered term. [...]
(ii) The reason for the change. [...]
(iii) The consequence of recognising an acquired right. [...]
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 832, 2089, 2682, 2986, 3135, 3909, 4028, 4711
Keywords:
acquired right;
Consideration 7
Extract:
Regarding the nature of the amendment, the Tribunal’s case law has drawn a distinction between the right to receive a benefit, such as healthcare and pension, which is a key condition of employment, and the obligation to contribute financially to that benefit, which is ancillary and may change in rate or amount. In Judgment 4028, consideration 13, the Tribunal found that “the change to another health insurance scheme does not affect the staff’s actual right to membership of a social security scheme but concerns solely the terms and conditions for giving effect to this right”. By analogy, there is no vested right for the employees to a particular method of funding insurance benefits. Moreover, in Judgment 4195, consideration 9, concerning the EPO’s decision to increase sickness insurance contributions for employees’ spouses, the Tribunal found that the EPO was entitled to adjust the contribution rates within reasonable limits if there are compelling reasons, including budgetary reasons. The abolition of the ceiling in the present case only involves a potential increase in employees’ contributions, a part of the terms and conditions regarding the complainant’s right to health insurance and does not affect the complainant’s fundamental rights and the entitlement to health insurance.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4028, 4195
Keywords:
acquired right; health insurance;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; complaint dismissed; health insurance;
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant’s reliance on his acquired rights is misplaced. The abolition of the 2.4 per cent ceiling was part of a broader reform transforming the EPO’s health insurance from a pay-as-you-go scheme to a funded scheme, due to financial reasons.
Keywords:
acquired right; financial considerations; health insurance;
Judgment 5079
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests Administrative Council decision CA/D 7/10, by which the EPO amended Article 83 of the Service Regulations for permanent employees of the European Patent Office, abolishing the ceiling of 2.4 per cent of the basic salary on employees’ healthcare insurance contributions.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; complaint dismissed; contribution rate; contributions; health insurance; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 13
Extract:
In conclusion, the abolition of the 2.4 per cent ceiling on employee contributions has not altered a fundamental and essential term of employment affecting the complainant’s acquired rights. It has not resulted in any adverse effect on the balance of contractual obligations either. It follows that the complainant’s plea alleging a violation of his acquired rights is unfounded.
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; contribution rate; contributions; health insurance;
Judgment 5074
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to grant her diplomatic privileges and immunities following the introduction of a new career system and the transposition of her grade into that system.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; competence of tribunal; complaint dismissed; host state; international instrument; interpretation; privileges and immunities;
Consideration 8
Extract:
[The complainant] further alleges an infringement of her acquired rights and a lack of transitional measures. However, it is evident that she had no acquired rights, as she had not accrued the required seniority for AO status at the time the new career system entered into force. Furthermore, the EPO did adopt transitional measures, which fell within its discretionary power and which were, in the present case, reasonable. What the complainant actually contends is a lack of a transitional measure tailored to her situation, but her contention is untenable, having regard to the discretionary nature of transitional measures.
Keywords:
acquired right; privileges and immunities;
Judgment 5073
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the decisions not to grant them diplomatic privileges and immunities following the introduction of a new career system and the transposition of their grades into that system.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; competence of tribunal; complaint dismissed; host state; international instrument; interpretation; privileges and immunities;
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainants further allege an infringement of their acquired rights and a lack of transitional measures. However, it is evident that they had no acquired rights, as they had not accrued the required seniority for AO status at the time the new career system entered into force. Furthermore, the EPO did adopt transitional measures, which fell within its discretionary power and which were, in the present case, reasonable. What the complainants actually contend is a lack of a transitional measure tailored to their situation, but this contention is untenable, having regard to the discretionary nature of transitional measures.
Keywords:
acquired right; privileges and immunities;
Judgment 5072
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a Board of Appeal member, challenges the fact that he did not receive an automatic salary advancement following the repeal of the transitional provisions contained in decision CA/D 4/15.
Consideration 14
Extract:
Where no acquired rights have been breached – as is the case here –there is no requirement on an administrative body, when adopting a general decision on a particular topic, to follow the provisions of similar decisions that it had previously adopted on the same topic or guidance that it has previously issued on the matter. It still has the possibility to lay down new provisions or issue new guidance if it considers it appropriate so to do.
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules;
Judgment 5071
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the amount of the salary advancement he received under transitional provisions applicable to chairmen and members of the Boards of Appeal following the introduction of a new career system.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; career; complaint dismissed; grade; salary;
Judgment 5069
140th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the failure to transpose them to a new grade following the introduction of a new career system.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[The Tribunal] also noted that examiners still had the possibility of being promoted to a position of director or member of the Boards of Appeal through a selection procedure. As for the employees concerned who – like the complainant in Judgment 4990 – were not examiners, the Tribunal found that career progression options were still available to them too as they could apply for a post of director, head of department or team manager. Lastly, the Tribunal pointed out that all the employees concerned could, moreover, still obtain an increase in salary through bonuses, functional allowances or salary adjustments. The Tribunal therefore concluded that the solution adopted for those staff within the new career system struck a “reasonable balance which did not alter [their] essential terms of employment”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4990
Keywords:
acquired right; career; promotion;
Consideration 9
Extract:
In consideration 8 of the aforementioned Judgment 4711, the terms of which were confirmed in consideration 6 of Judgment 4889, the Tribunal found, with regard to the criteria referred to, that the abolition of seniority-based step advancement and its replacement – generally speaking – by merit-based step advancement did not constitute a breach of the acquired rights of the Office’s employees. The Tribunal based this finding in particular on the consideration that, while it was true that employees no longer had the right to automatic advancement, they were not deprived, under the new career system, of the opportunity to benefit from a step advancement in appropriate circumstances.
Similarly, in consideration 7 of Judgment 4889, the Tribunal held that the amendment made to the provisions governing promotions, whose objective was to make grade advancement more dependent on the assessment of performance and the evidence of expected competencies, did not constitute a breach of acquired rights.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4711, 4889
Keywords:
acquired right; promotion; step;
Judgment 5031
140th Session, 2025
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: La requérante conteste la réduction du montant de son indemnité forfaitaire de dactylographie calculée proportionnellement à la réduction de son temps de travail.
Consideration 7
Extract:
Le Tribunal rappelle que, selon une jurisprudence bien établie, il n’y a de violation d’un droit acquis que lorsque la modification d’une disposition au détriment d’un fonctionnaire et sans son consentement bouleverse l’économie du contrat d’engagement ou porte atteinte aux conditions d’emploi fondamentales qui ont déterminé l’agent à entrer en service (voir, notamment, les jugements 4767, au considérant 4, 4381, au considérant 14, 4195, au considérant 7, et 4028, au considérant 13).
En l’espèce, il ne peut être question d’une éventuelle violation des droits acquis de l’intéressée. En effet, la réduction du montant de l’indemnité de dactylographie en raison d’une modification du temps de travail de la requérante ne saurait, en tout état de cause, être considérée comme constituant un bouleversement de l’économie de son contrat d’engagement ou une atteinte aux conditions d’emploi fondamentales qui l’auraient déterminée à entrer au service d’Eurocontrol.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4028, 4195, 4381, 4767
Keywords:
acquired right;
Judgment 4990
139th Session, 2025
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the abolition of automatic step advancement pursuant to the introduction of a new career system.
Consideration 3
Extract:
[S]taff rules providing for the grant of promotion within an international organisation do not confer any acquired rights on staff. Unless the new rules substantially deprive staff of their former prospects for advancement, an organisation always has the ability to amend those arrangements according to need.
Keywords:
acquired right; career; step;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The rules applicable to step advancement and promotions were reformed by decision CA/D 10/14 in order to base career progression on proven performance and demonstration of expected competencies, but the promotion opportunities offered to staff were not substantially affected.
Keywords:
acquired right; career; promotion; step;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; career; complaint dismissed; step;
Judgment 4898
138th Session, 2024
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the abolition of the permanent invalidity lump sum.
Consideration 10
Extract:
In light of its precedents, the Tribunal notes that the suppression of the invalidity lump sum did not infringe an acquired right, as such a lump sum cannot be considered an essential term of employment which induced the complainant to accept the appointment and to stay on. By its nature, the payment of a lump sum in case of the invalidity of a staff member is a remote and contingent right which arises only on the rare occurrence of the permanent invalidity of an official occurring while the official is still employed by the EPO (see Judgments 4398, considerations 11 and 12, and 3375, consideration 13). The triggering event underlying the payment of the lump sum is the permanent invalidity, not the fact that the complainant paid contributions. Hence, many staff members have contributed to the insurance throughout their whole career without receiving the lump sum. In addition, in the case of such an invalidity, other benefits and emoluments are provided for in the “social security package”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3375, 4398
Keywords:
acquired right; invalidity;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; complaint dismissed; general decision; invalidity; payslip;
Judgment 4889
138th Session, 2024
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge their transposition to a new grade following the introduction of a new career system.
Consideration 7
Extract:
[T]he complainants submit that their acquired rights were also breached by the amendment of the provisions governing grade promotion. They consider that this amendment unlawfully brought to an end the system for “quasi-automatic promotion” which, they claim, was in force prior to the disputed reform and also constituted a fundamental term of their employment.
But the Tribunal cannot accept this line of argument either.
It is well settled in the case law, drawing on the same principles as those set out in the aforementioned consideration 8 of Judgment 4711, that the provisions providing for the grant of promotion within an international organisation do not confer any acquired rights on staff. Unless the new rules substantially deprive staff of their former prospects for advancement, an organisation always has the ability to amend those arrangements according to need (see, in particular, Judgments 3524, consideration 3, 3256, consideration 14, or 1025, consideration 4).
In the present case, it is plain from the file that, although the effect of decision CA/D 10/14 on the rules governing promotion was indeed to make career progression more dependent on the assessment of performance and evidence of expected competencies, the opportunities for promotion open to staff were not substantially affected.
[...]
[I]t was lawful for the provisions in question, which deal with simple arrangements for the grant of promotion within the meaning of the aforementioned case law, to amend the earlier text without causing any breach of acquired rights.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1025, 3256, 3524, 4711
Keywords:
acquired right; promotion; step;
Judgment 4767
137th Session, 2024
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant requests a compensatory allowance to offset financial losses resulting from a restructuring.
Consideration 4
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls that, according to established case law, an acquired right is breached only when the amendment of a rule to the official’s detriment and without her or his consent disturbs the structure of the contract of appointment or impairs fundamental terms of appointment in consideration of which the official accepted appointment (see, in particular, Judgments 4381, consideration 14, 4195, consideration 7, and 4028, consideration 13).
In the present case, there can be no question of any breach of the complainant’s acquired rights. In view of the relative amount involved, the pay reduction at issue cannot be regarded as disturbing the structure of the contract of appointments or impairing fundamental terms of appointment in consideration of which the complainant joined Eurocontrol.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4028, 4195, 4381
Keywords:
acquired right;
Judgment 4766
137th Session, 2024
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant requests a compensatory allowance to offset financial losses resulting from a restructuring.
Consideration 4
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls that, according to established case law, an acquired right is breached only when the amendment of a rule to the official’s detriment and without her or his consent disturbs the structure of the contract of appointment or impairs fundamental terms of appointment in consideration of which the official accepted appointment (see, in particular, Judgments 4381, consideration 14, 4195, consideration 7, and 4028, consideration 13).
In the present case, there can be no question of any breach of the complainant’s acquired rights. In view of the relative amount involved, the pay reduction at issue cannot be regarded as disturbing the structure of the contract of appointment or impairing fundamental terms of appointment in consideration of which the complainant joined Eurocontrol.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4028, 4195, 4381
Keywords:
acquired right;
Judgment 4737
137th Session, 2024
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who was the Secretary-General of the Energy Charter Secretariat, challenges the decision not to launch the procedure for his reappointment as Secretary-General.
Consideration 13
Extract:
It is true that the terms on which [the complainant] was initially appointed expressly, in his letter of appointment, recognised his right to have protected any acquired right. But the relevant question is whether a right to repeatedly reapply for the position was an acquired right which could not be altered. The Tribunal’s case law recognises that international civil servants’ conditions of employment existing at the time of recruitment are not immutable and need not, of necessity, be applied to them throughout their careers (see, for example, Judgment 4465, considerations 5 to 8). The Tribunal is not satisfied that an unconstrained right to reapply for the position of Secretary-General meets the criteria of an acquired right identified in, for example, Judgment 4195, consideration 7.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4195, 4465
Keywords:
acquired right; appointment; executive head;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
|
