Subsequent fact (42,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Subsequent fact
Total judgments found: 16

• Judgment 5182

  
  141st Session, 2026
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to suspend him from service in the context of a disciplinary procedure.

  Consideration 14

  Extract:

  “The Tribunal has consistently held that a suspension imposed in the context of disciplinary proceedings, whether with or without pay, is an interim measure that does not prejudge the outcome of the disciplinary process. As such a decision involves the exercise of discretion, the Tribunal’s review is limited. Importantly, the lawfulness of such a measure must be assessed at the date of its adoption; later developments may bear on its continuation but do not retroactively affect its initial legality.”

  Keywords:

  disciplinary procedure; subsequent fact; suspension;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 5000

  
  139th Session, 2025
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the “deemed rejection” of his request for an investigation into the alleged misconduct of the Assistant Director-General at the WHO Headquarters in Geneva; the determination by the Office of Compliance, Risk Management and Ethics that he had not suffered retaliation, and that he was not entitled to protection against retaliation; and WHO’s decision to accept his resignation which he claims constitutes constructive dismissal.

  Consideration 21

  Extract:

  The Tribunal notes that events which postdate the adoption of the impugned decision cannot, as a rule, be taken into account (see, for example, Judgment 3037, consideration 11).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3037
  

  Keywords:

  subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4948

  
  139th Session, 2025
  International Criminal Court
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to suspend him from duty with pay and with immediate effect.

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  S’agissant du premier moyen du requérant, portant sur l’irrégularité de la procédure interne suivie par l’organisation, l’intéressé soutient que, contrairement à une jurisprudence constante du Tribunal, la Commission de recours aurait considéré des faits postérieurs à ceux dont les parties avaient connaissance au moment où la décision de suspension a été prise, que la procédure interne aurait été entachée de partialité et aurait été inéquitable et que la communication du rapport du Mécanisme à la Commission de recours aurait violé la confidentialité de ce document. […]
  Le Tribunal constate d’abord que, pour l’essentiel des extraits du rapport de la Commission de recours au sujet desquels le requérant lui fait le reproche d’avoir considéré des faits postérieurs à la décision de le suspendre, ceux-ci se trouvent dans la partie du rapport qui dresse un rappel des faits et de la procédure, et non dans la partie du rapport concernant l’analyse, les considérants et les recommandations. Il n’est par conséquent pas établi que la Commission aurait fondé son analyse sur des éléments postérieurs à la notification de la suspension ou que ces éléments auraient influencé ses conclusions.
  Les seuls paragraphes du rapport faisant partie de l’analyse et des considérants de la Commission de recours auxquels renvoie le requérant au soutien de cet argument touchent des faits qui, s’ils sont effectivement postérieurs, ont simplement été relevés par la Commission pour confirmer l’exactitude des faits qui étaient à la connaissance de l’organisation avant sa prise de décision quant à la suspension. Par exemple, les courriels envoyés par M. D. au Procureur postérieurement à la notification de la suspension ne fournissaient qu’une confirmation écrite des allégations portées verbalement à la connaissance du Procureur par ce dernier et ne sauraient constituer des faits postérieurs à la mesure contestée, dont la Commission ne devait pas tenir compte, au sens de la jurisprudence précitée du Tribunal sur la question.
  En ce qui concerne les références aux communications du requérant avec son supérieur immédiat, M. B., ou avec son collègue, M. D., postérieurement à la décision de suspension, elles ont simplement étayé les conclusions de la Commission selon lesquelles le requérant était bien au courant de la motivation à l’appui de cette décision et que son argument selon lequel il n’avait pas été dûment informé en temps utile des raisons de sa suspension n’était pas fondé.
  Quant au renvoi de la Commission à certains faits postérieurs à la décision de suspension pour répondre aux arguments du requérant sur la prétendue violation du devoir de sollicitude et de bonne foi, dès lors que les arguments du requérant à cet égard portaient sur des gestes posés ou des situations survenues après cette décision, ainsi que sur les conséquences vécues par ce dernier à la suite de celle-ci, force est de constater qu’il ne s’agit pas là de faits postérieurs au sens où l’entend la jurisprudence quant à l’analyse des motifs à l’appui de la décision de suspendre un fonctionnaire, mais de simples renvois à des faits pertinents à l’analyse de la violation potentielle de son devoir de sollicitude par l’organisation.
  Ensuite, une jurisprudence constante du Tribunal rappelle que la charge de la preuve à l’appui d’une allégation de partialité ou de traitement inéquitable dans le cadre de la procédure interne appartient au requérant (voir, par exemple, le jugement 4523, au considérant 8), et le Tribunal estime que les écritures n’appuient pas de façon convaincante cette assertion de l’intéressé.
  Enfin, le Tribunal observe que le requérant n’est pas fondé à soutenir que la communication du rapport du Mécanisme à la Commission de recours aurait violé la confidentialité de ce rapport. Il n’identifie en effet aucune disposition statutaire qui aurait été méconnue à cet égard, sachant qu’il avait lui-même commenté en détail le rapport du Mécanisme dans le cadre de la procédure interne devant cette Commission. En outre, cette communication ne portait aucunement atteinte à l’exigence d’impartialité de la Commission.
  Ce premier moyen est sans fondement et doit être écarté.

  Keywords:

  bias; confidentiality; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4768

  
  137th Session, 2024
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant impugns what he refers to as decisions concerning Eurocontrol Agency’s reorganisation and his transfer following that reorganisation.

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  The complainant submits that the organisational charts of 4 May 2020 and 5 May 2020 [...] are unlawful or invalid. However, these documents post-date the complainant’s internal complaint of 21 October 2019 and he cannot in any event allege that they are unlawful for the first time before the Tribunal. This claim must therefore also be dismissed as irreceivable.

  Keywords:

  subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3686

  
  122nd Session, 2016
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the Director-General’s final decision on her internal appeal in relation to the issuance of new terms of reference altering the functions of her post, arguing that the compensation she was offered was inadequate.

  Consideration 35

  Extract:

  In Judgment 2364, consideration 2, the Tribunal considered grounds of complaint based on facts arising subsequent to the impugned decision.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2364
  

  Keywords:

  decision; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3037

  
  111th Session, 2011
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  "The Tribunal recalls the principle that the lawfulness of a measure must be appraised as at the date of its adoption. In consequence thereof all subsequent facts are irrelevant (see Judgment 2365, under 4(c))."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2365
  

  Keywords:

  date; decision; general principle; judicial review; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2364

  
  97th Session, 2004
  Universal Postal Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 2

  Extract:

  "Even though it is only the 'decision' of 10 March 2002 which he wishes to have set aside, the complainant refers to facts which arose after that date and adds in his rejoinder that, since the final decision was dated 23 July 2002, 'all grievances raised until that date can validly be taken into account' as part of his complaint. [...] With regard to the claims based on facts subsequent to 10 March 2002 and presented as grounds for appeal, since internal remedies were not exhausted (Article VII(1) of the Statute of the Tribunal), they must be deemed irreceivable. [...] Furthermore, the validity of a decision or measure cannot be judged on the basis of facts occurring subsequently to that decision or measure."

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT reference: Article VII(1) of the Statute
  
  

  Keywords:

  claim; complaint; date; grounds; iloat statute; internal remedies exhausted; new claim; receivability of the complaint; rejoinder; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2089

  
  92nd Session, 2002
  European Molecular Biology Laboratory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 16

  Extract:

  "To accept that pensions must always be adjusted to keep in line with post-retirement salary increases would be to expose pension funds to an uncertain and unmeasurable future liability which might well in the end wipe out the funds themselves."

  Keywords:

  acceptance; adjustment; discontinuance; increase; pension; pension adjustment system; retirement; salary; separation from service; special hazard; subsequent fact; unjspf;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1327

  
  76th Session, 1994
  Pan American Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "Even though later incidents and correspondence may have suggested that there was some possibility of a change in the organization's position", the material decision remained "final" within the meaning of Rule 1230.7.1.

  Reference(s)

  Organization rules reference: PAHO STAFF RULE 1230.7.1
  
  

  Keywords:

  complaint; decision; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 986

  
  67th Session, 1989
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 21-22

  Extract:

  A decision "will be reviewed in the context of fact and law that obtained when it was taken, else there would be breach of the general rule against retroactivity that is binding on any administrative authority and court of law. That precept does, however, allow of limited qualification [...] A decision taken after the one impugned may, if more favourable, repeal it with retroactive effect".

  Keywords:

  decision; exception; general principle; non-retroactivity; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 976

  
  66th Session, 1989
  Universal Postal Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  Since the Administrative Circular "was issued after the date of the impugned decision, it can have no effect on the lawfulness of that decision".

  Keywords:

  administrative instruction; decision; effect; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 649

  
  55th Session, 1985
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  "The plea fails since the [new] facts are subsequent to the date of [the judgment] and therefore cannot have an effect on that decision."

  Keywords:

  consequence; judgment of the tribunal; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 528

  
  49th Session, 1982
  European Organization for Nuclear Research
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  The Administrative Circular to which reference is made "is subsequent both to the facts of the case and to the termination of the complainant's appointment, and neither party may rely on it."

  Keywords:

  administrative instruction; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 269

  
  36th Session, 1976
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  "Being bound by the scope of the complainant's claims for relief the Tribunal is not required to consider the complainant's allegation of an attempt at bribery. If that allegation were proved the attempt at bribery would be subsequent to the abolition of post and merely a consequence thereof. Hence it cannot properly be relied upon to justify the quashing of the impugned decision and the complainant's reinstatement, the only claims for relief which she has made."

  Keywords:

  claim; competence of tribunal; complaint; limits; receivability of the complaint; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 224

  
  31st Session, 1973
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations

  Extract:

  "Insofar as [the complainant] is claiming compensation on account of circumstances or actions of the [organisation] subsequent to [the date of expiry of his contract], he had at [that time] severed all his ties with [the organisation] and the dossier shows no trace of action by [the organisation] subsequent to [the material date] which might have arisen out of previous action or caused further injury to a former staff member who was no longer employed by [the organisation]."

  Keywords:

  cause of action; consequence; lack of injury; locus standi; no cause of action; separation from service; subsequent fact;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 115

  
  18th Session, 1967
  World Meteorological Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 1

  Extract:

  "At the request of [the] complainant [...], the Tribunal ordered [the witness to] be heard [...] and [the complainant's] personal file [to be disclosed]. The Tribunal considered, however, that the delivery of [the] complainant's medical file and of a document concerning events subsequent to the filing of the complaint was unnecessary for the disposition of the case."

  Keywords:

  appraisal of evidence; disclosure of evidence; oral proceedings; personal file; request by a party; subsequent fact; testimony; tribunal;