|
|
 |
|
|
Exemplary damages (689,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Exemplary damages
Total judgments found: 34
1, 2 | next >
Judgment 5170
141st Session, 2026
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges Eurocontrol’s refusal to grant him, for the year 2021, the two days’ compensatory special leave to which he considers he is entitled as an emergency response officer (volunteer firefighter).
Consideration 4
Extract:
« Dans sa réplique, le requérant demande également que l’Agence soit condamnée à lui verser des dommages-intérêts exemplaires et punitifs. Mais le rejet des conclusions à fin d’octroi de dommages-intérêts ordinaires exclut, a fortiori, que soient prononcées de telles condamnations. Au surplus, il convient de rappeler qu’un requérant n’est pas recevable à formuler de nouvelles conclusions dans le cadre de sa réplique […]. »
Keywords:
exemplary damages; new claim; punitive damages; rejoinder;
Judgment 5162
141st Session, 2026
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the Administration’s refusal to recognise the overtime she worked in June and July 2020 during the Covid-19 sanitary crisis and seeks to have her entitlements restored for the five years preceding the filing of her complaint pursuant to French law.
Consideration 13
Extract:
«Le Tribunal rappelle […] que des dommages-intérêts punitifs ne peuvent être accordés que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles (voir, notamment, les jugements 5055, au considérant 14, 4659, au considérant 14, 4658, au considérant 10, 4506, au considérant 10, et 4391, au considérant 14), à savoir lorsqu’un requérant a présenté des preuves et une analyse convaincantes démontrant que la décision attaquée est entachée de parti pris, de malveillance, d’animosité, de mauvaise volonté, de mauvaise foi ou d’autres desseins répréhensibles (voir les jugements 5055, au considérant 14, 4820, au considérant 22, 4690, au considérant 16, et 4633, au considérant 16).»
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4506, 4633, 4658, 4659, 4690, 4820, 5055
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 5160
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 impose on him the disciplinary sanction of downgrading.
Consideration 13
Extract:
« Le Tribunal rappelle toutefois que des dommages-intérêts punitifs ne peuvent être accordés que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles (voir, notamment, les jugements 4659, au considérant 14, 4658, au considérant 10, 4506, au considérant 10, et 4391, au considérant 14), lesquelles ne se rencontrent pas en l’espèce. Par ailleurs, il n’aperçoit pas pourquoi il y aurait lieu de condamner la défenderesse au paiement de dommages-intérêts exemplaires, en sus des dommages-intérêts qui ont déjà été accordés ci-dessus. »
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4506, 4658, 4659
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 5142
141st Session, 2026
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the restitution of amounts wrongly deducted from her salary in respect of sickness insurance contributions.
Consideration 7
Extract:
«Dans la mesure où la requérante entendrait fonder sa demande sur l’obtention de dommages-intérêts punitifs, le Tribunal rappelle sa jurisprudence constante selon laquelle ces dommages-intérêts ne peuvent être accordés que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles (voir, notamment, les jugements 5055, au considérant 14, 4659, au considérant 14, 4658, au considérant 10, 4506, au considérant 10, et 4391, au considérant 14), à savoir lorsqu’un requérant a présenté des preuves et une analyse convaincantes démontrant que la décision attaquée est entachée de parti pris, de malveillance, d’animosité, de mauvaise volonté, de mauvaise foi ou d’autres desseins répréhensibles (voir les jugements 5055, au considérant 14, 4820, au considérant 22, 4690, au considérant 16, et 4633, au considérant 16). Or le Tribunal considère, au regard de cette jurisprudence, que de telles circonstances exceptionnelles ne se rencontrent pas en l’espèce. »
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4506, 4633, 4658, 4659, 4690, 4820, 5055
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 5134
141st Session, 2026
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the non-renewal of his contract based on his unsatisfactory performance.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant further seeks exemplary damages. As he has provided no evidence to demonstrate that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith, or other improper purpose on which to base an award of exemplary damages (see, for example, Judgment 4181, consideration 11), his claim for such damages will be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4181
Keywords:
exemplary damages;
Judgment 5056
140th Session, 2025
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Le requérant conteste, d’une part, la décision de rejet de ses demandes de réintégration à son poste au Siège de l’Organisation, ainsi que de suspension de la procédure de recrutement à ce poste, et, d’autre part, le rejet de sa plainte pour harcèlement institutionnel.
Consideration 16
Extract:
S’agissant de la demande de dommages-intérêts exemplaires, le requérant ne justifie aucunement, en tout état de cause, du bien-fondé de celle-ci dans ses écritures.
Le Tribunal rappelle par ailleurs que des dommages-intérêts punitifs ne peuvent être accordés que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles (voir, notamment, les jugements 4659, au considérant 14, 4658, au considérant 10, 4506, au considérant 10, et 4391, au considérant 14), à savoir lorsqu’un requérant a présenté des preuves et une analyse convaincantes démontrant que la décision attaquée est entachée de parti pris, de malveillance, d’animosité, de mauvaise volonté, de mauvaise foi ou d’autres desseins répréhensibles, ce qui justifie effectivement que le comportement de l’organisation défenderesse soit sanctionné par la condamnation au versement de tels intérêts (voir les jugements 4820, au considérant 22, 4690, au considérant 16, et 4633, au considérant 16).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4506, 4633, 4658, 4659, 4690, 4820
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 5055
140th Session, 2025
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Le requérant conteste la décision de renvoi sans préavis dont il a fait l’objet.
Consideration 14
Extract:
S’agissant de la demande de dommages-intérêts exemplaires, le requérant ne justifie aucunement, en tout état de cause, du bien-fondé de celle-ci dans ses écritures.
Le Tribunal rappelle par ailleurs que des dommages-intérêts punitifs ne peuvent être accordés que dans des circonstances exceptionnelles (voir, notamment, les jugements 4659, au considérant 14, 4658, au considérant 10, 4506, au considérant 10, et 4391, au considérant 14), à savoir lorsqu’un requérant a présenté des preuves et une analyse convaincantes démontrant que la décision attaquée est entachée de parti pris, de malveillance, d’animosité, de mauvaise volonté, de mauvaise foi ou d’autres desseins répréhensibles, ce qui justifie effectivement que le comportement de l’organisation défenderesse soit sanctionné par la condamnation au versement de tels dommages-intérêts (voir les jugements 4820, au considérant 22, 4690, au considérant 16, et 4633, au considérant 16).
Le Tribunal considère, au regard de cette jurisprudence, que de telles circonstances exceptionnelles ne se rencontrent pas en l’espèce.
Ces demandes seront donc rejetées.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4506, 4633, 4658, 4659, 4690, 4820
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 5054
140th Session, 2025
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Le requérant conteste la décision de le réaffecter dans un bureau hors Siège de l’Organisation.
Consideration 15
Extract:
Le requérant demande que l’Organisation soit condamnée à lui verser des dommages-intérêts exemplaires, ainsi que des dommages-intérêts punitifs, en raison du comportement adopté par l’Organisation à son égard.
S’agissant de la demande de dommages-intérêts exemplaires, le Tribunal note que le requérant ne justifie aucunement, en tout état de cause, du bien-fondé de celle-ci dans ses écritures.
S’agissant de la demande de dommages-intérêts punitifs, le rejet, pour les motifs ci-dessus exposés, des conclusions à fin d’octroi de dommages-intérêts ordinaires exclut, a fortiori, que soit prononcée une condamnation à ce titre, qui ne saurait se justifier, selon la jurisprudence du Tribunal, qu’en cas de comportement fautif de l’Organisation d’une particulière gravité (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4640, au considérant 15, ou 4391, au considérant 14).
Ces demandes seront donc rejetées.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4640
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 5050
140th Session, 2025
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: La requérante conteste les décisions prises par l’Organisation concernant la demande de reclassement de son poste.
Consideration 15
Extract:
Considérant 15: dommages-intérêts exemplaires, dommages-intérêts punitifs
[L]a requérante [demande] que l’UNESCO soit condamnée à lui verser des dommages-intérêts punitifs […] [L]e rejet, pour les motifs ci-dessus exposés, des conclusions à fin d’octroi de dommages-intérêts ordinaires exclut, a fortiori, que soit prononcée une telle condamnation, qui ne se justifie, selon la jurisprudence du Tribunal, qu’en cas de comportement fautif d’une organisation d’une particulière gravité (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4640, au considérant 15, ou 4391, au considérant 14).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4640
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 4959
139th Session, 2025
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the calculation of his leave entitlement for public holidays in 2021 and of the deductions made in this respect because he worked part-time.
Consideration 20
Extract:
[M]algré la désinvolture et le mépris regrettable de l’Organisation envers son obligation de traiter adéquatement et diligemment la réclamation de l’intéressé, le Tribunal considère que de telles circonstances ne se rencontrent pas en l’espèce. Il n’y a donc pas lieu de faire droit à cette conclusion.
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 4835
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to rescind an offer of employment that had been extended to him, on the basis that he had been disciplined for sexual misconduct.
Consideration 11
Extract:
There are however no bases on which to accept the complainant’s claim for exemplary damages, which are only warranted in exceptional circumstances that are not evident in this case.
Keywords:
exemplary damages;
Judgment 4820
138th Session, 2024
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to dismiss his moral harassment complaints, and claims compensation for the injury which he considers he has suffered.
Consideration 22
Extract:
The complainant requests that the Organisation be ordered to pay 25,000 euros in punitive damages for its unfair conduct.
However, the Tribunal recalls that, according to consistent precedent, an award of punitive damages is only warranted in exceptional circumstances (see, in particular, Judgments 4659, consideration 14, 4658, consideration 10, 4506, consideration 10, and 4391, consideration 14), and finds that such circumstances are not evident in this case.
There are, therefore, no grounds for granting this request.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4391, 4506, 4658, 4659
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 4690
136th Session, 2023
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to uphold his transfer to Budapest.
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant has been represented by experienced counsel who has attested to the complainant’s pleas. It is true that the complainant seeks, but only by way of relief nominated in the complaint form and at the conclusion of the brief by way of summary, 300,000 euros as exemplary damages. In general, these damages are meant to sanction bias, ill will, malice, bad faith, and other improper purpose (see, for example, Judgment 3092, consideration 16). However, in his pleas (both in his brief and rejoinder) the complainant makes no submission at all about exemplary damages, and he confines his submissions to moral damages. The two are different. Moral damages are to compensate for a moral injury. Exemplary damages are awarded as a sanction for the defendant organisation’s conduct. In the absence of pleas expressly addressing a claim for exemplary damages, it would be entirely inappropriate for the Tribunal to award them.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3092
Keywords:
exemplary damages; moral damages;
Judgment 4659
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him for serious misconduct.
Consideration 14
Extract:
[D]espite the conspicuous nature of some of the defects identified, there are no grounds to accept the complainant’s claim for exemplary or punitive damages. An award of such damages is only warranted in exceptional circumstances, which are not evident in this case.
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 4658
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges his suspension with pay during disciplinary proceedings against him.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[D]espite the conspicuous nature of some of the defects identified, there are no grounds to accept the complainant’s claim for exemplary or punitive damages. An award of such damages is only warranted in exceptional circumstances, which are not evident in this case.
Keywords:
exemplary damages; punitive damages;
Judgment 4633
135th Session, 2023
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on him the sanction of demotion.
Consideration 16
Extract:
Exemplary damages may be awarded if a complainant has provided persuasive evidence and analysis to demonstrate that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith or other improper purpose attending the impugned decision (see, for example, Judgment 4181, consideration 11). [The complainant] asserts this is so in the present case. However, what cannot be overlooked is that it simply cannot be said that the disciplinary proceedings against the complainant were unwarranted. They plainly were justified. While the opinion of the Disciplinary Committee was flawed in the way already discussed, as was the impugned decision, the Committee’s analysis nonetheless reveals a case against the complainant which is not devoid of substance. If it is proved, his conduct was egregious. It is simply untenable for the complainant to adopt the position, as he effectively does, of simply being an innocent victim of persecutory conduct within the EPO. Exemplary damages are not warranted.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4181
Keywords:
exemplary damages;
Judgment 4603
135th Session, 2023
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term appointment on account of his unsatisfactory performance.
Consideration 13
Extract:
As the complainant has provided no evidence or analysis to demonstrate that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith or other improper purpose on which to base an award of exemplary damages (see, for example, Judgment 4181, under 11), his claim for such damages will be dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4181
Keywords:
exemplary damages;
Judgment 4596
135th Session, 2023
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to pay him a termination indemnity upon the expiry of his fixed-term appointment.
Consideration 17
Extract:
With regard to the claim for exemplary damages, the complainant has provided no evidence or analysis to establish that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith, or other improper purpose on which to base an award of exemplary damages (see, for example, Judgments 4286, consideration 19, and 3419, consideration 8). Accordingly, no exemplary damages will be awarded.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3419, 4286
Keywords:
burden of proof; exemplary damages;
Judgment 4578
135th Session, 2023
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to investigate his allegations of harassment.
Consideration 10
Extract:
As the complainant has not substantiated his allegations that the decision to close the case was taken for an improper purpose amounting to abuse of authority (see, for example, Judgments 3939, consideration 10, and 3172, consideration 16) or that it was based on bias (see, for example, Judgment 4010, consideration 9); that it was tainted by personal prejudice (see, for example, Judgment 3912, consideration 13) or bad faith (see, for example, Judgment 3902, consideration 11), there is no basis on which to grant exemplary damages which he claims (see, for example, Judgment 3092, consideration 16).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3092, 3172, 3902, 3912, 3939, 4010
Keywords:
exemplary damages;
Judgment 4522
134th Session, 2022
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to conduct an investigation into allegations of breach of confidentiality and the refusal to disclose two documents.
Consideration 19
Extract:
With regard to the request for exemplary damages, the complainant has provided no evidence or analysis to establish that there was bias, ill will, malice, bad faith or other improper purpose on which to base an award of punitive damages (see, for example, Judgments 4286, consideration 19, and 3419, consideration 8). Accordingly, no exemplary damages will be awarded.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3419, 4286
Keywords:
exemplary damages;
1, 2 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
