Material damages (693, 665,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Material damages
Total judgments found: 181
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
Judgment 5196
141st Session, 2026
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the amount of moral damages awarded to him following the setting aside of a decision that was declared unlawful.
Consideration 3
Extract:
Aucune conclusion tendant à l’octroi de dommages-intérêts pour tort matériel n’ayant été formulée dans le cadre du recours interne, le requérant ne saurait demander pareille réparation devant le Tribunal (voir, en ce sens, les jugements 4801, au considérant 6, 4796, au considérant 16, 4752, au considérant 2, 4304, au considérant 8, et 3967, au considérant 5).
Il s’ensuit que la présente requête doit être déclarée irrecevable en ce qu’elle tend à obtenir la réparation du préjudice matériel.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3967, 4304, 4752, 4796, 4801
Keywords:
internal remedies not exhausted; material damages; receivability of the complaint;
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 16
Extract:
«Les […] intervenants se trouvent, ainsi que l’admet la défenderesse, dans une situation de droit et de fait similaire à celle de la requérante en ce qu’ils contestent des décisions prises par la chef de l’Unité des ressources humaines et services […] portant refus de prendre en considération les heures supplémentaires qu’ils ont effectuées sur site lors de la pandémie de Covid-19. En outre, ils avaient également formé une réclamation qui a été examinée conjointement avec celle de la requérante par la Commission paritaire des litiges. Leurs demandes d’intervention sont accueillies. Ils auront droit, en conséquence, à bénéficier de la réparation des préjudices matériel et moral qu’ils ont subis, tels que déterminés dans le présent jugement, étant entendu que le montant du préjudice matériel sera calculé en fonction de leur situation propre. Des intérêts moratoires au taux de 5 pour cent l’an leur seront également versés par la défenderesse dans les conditions fixées au considérant 11 [...].»
Keywords:
interveners; intervention; material damages; moral damages;
Judgment 5156
141st Session, 2026
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests her dismissal for misconduct.
Consideration 36
Extract:
“As an alternative to reinstatement, the complainant is entitled to an award of material damages […] which are not corresponding to the whole loss of her salary. Material damages should be determined taking into account that if the disciplinary proceedings would have been properly carried out, she might have been issued with a less severe sanction which might, in any case, have had financial consequences for her. The Tribunal deems it appropriate and fair to assess the material damages in a lump sum equivalent to the complainant’s remuneration for two years, which will be calculated on the basis of the net salary and allowances of any kind which she was receiving at the time of her dismissal, without deducting from this sum any earnings which she may have received since then. As this lump sum must be regarded as compensating for the entire material injury suffered by the complainant, there is no need to add to it the amount of the pension contributions relating to the remuneration in question or to pay interest for late payment thereon (see, for example, Judgment 4660, consideration 22).”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4660
Keywords:
loss of opportunity; material damages; termination of employment;
Judgment 5153
141st Session, 2026
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the non-renewal of his temporary appointment.
Consideration 16
Extract:
“Without descending into detail, the normative legal framework governing temporary appointments in WHO, and the Tribunal’s case law (see, for example, Judgment 4916, consideration 8), make it quite clear that there can be no expectation of appointment to a further temporary contract after the expiry of an existing one. Nonetheless, he lost the valuable opportunity to have his contract extended and is, accordingly, entitled to material damages equivalent to six months of net salary at the grade NO-C, step 2 level.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4916
Keywords:
loss of opportunity; material damages; material injury; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 5113
141st Session, 2026
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests his Performance Appraisal Report (PAR) for the period from 1 June 2021 to 31 May 2022 and the decision not to renew his appointment due to unsatisfactory performance.
Consideration 10
Extract:
“[T]he reinstatement of an official on a fixed-term contract is ordered only in exceptional cases […]. In the present case, having also regard to the time that has elapsed since the complainant’s separation from the organisation, the Tribunal considers that reinstatement would not be appropriate. However, as a result of the unlawful decision not to renew his appointment, the complainant lost a valuable opportunity to pursue his employment with the organisation, in respect of which he is entitled to an award of material damages. In the circumstances of this case, the Tribunal assesses those damages in the amount of 60,000 euros. The complainant is also entitled to moral damages for the breach of the organisation’s duty of care, which the Tribunal assesses at 15,000 euros.”
Keywords:
duty of care; fixed-term; loss of opportunity; material damages; moral damages; non-renewal of contract; reinstatement;
Judgment 5111
141st Session, 2026
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to renew his appointment.
Consideration 14
Extract:
“[T]he complainant requests reinstatement or, alternatively, material damages […]. The Tribunal recalls that, according to its consistent case law, a temporary appointment carries no expectation of renewal […]. Even if the reasons for non-renewal had not been flawed, there would have been no guarantee that the complainant’s contract would have been renewed. His request for reinstatement is therefore rejected. However, because the complainant lost a valuable opportunity to have his contract renewed due to the defects established above, he is entitled to material damages to compensate for that loss of opportunity, which the Tribunal assesses at a lump sum of 30,000 euros.”
Keywords:
duty of care; fixed-term; loss of opportunity; material damages; moral damages; non-renewal of contract; reinstatement;
Judgment 5100
141st Session, 2026
ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to extend her contract for one year only.
Consideration 9
Extract:
“The complainant seeks material damages […]. The difficulty with this contention is that the complainant did not even serve the one year for which her appointment was extended. She decided to seek out and accept employment with another organisation after only 6 months of her one-year extension. The Tribunal finds, therefore, that the complainant has suffered no material injury. Her claim for compensation under this head is accordingly rejected.”
Keywords:
material damages; material injury; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 5045
140th Session, 2025
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the communication, addressed by the IAEA to all of its staff members of British nationality, informing them that officials holding a residence permit under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union would be considered as having obtained permanent residence status in the country of their duty station (Austria), which would affect their home leave and repatriation grant entitlements as well as the privileges and immunities granted to them.
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainant seeks payment of 1,735 euros for one home leave cycle but there is no persuasive evidence that this amount was claimed, and payment was refused. There has been no “non-observance [...] of the Staff Regulations” which, in this respect, is foundational to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction (see Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute). His claim for orders concerning future entitlements to home leave should also be rejected.
Keywords:
home leave; material damages;
Consideration 19
Extract:
[The complainant] seeks an order concerning his entitlement to a repatriation grant. But whether he is entitled to the repatriation grant only arises for consideration at the date of separation […] No occasion arises to make an order about this entitlement given that the complainant is still a member of the staff of the IAEA.
Keywords:
material damages; repatriation allowance; separation from service;
Judgment 5044
140th Session, 2025
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the communication, addressed by the IAEA to all of its staff members of British nationality, informing them that officials holding a residence permit under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union would be considered as having obtained permanent residence status in the country of their duty station (Austria), which would affect their home leave and repatriation grant entitlements as well as the privileges and immunities granted to them.
Consideration 16
Extract:
[The complainant] seeks an order concerning his entitlement to a repatriation grant. But whether he is entitled to the repatriation grant only arises for consideration at the date of separation […] No occasion arises to make an order about this entitlement given that the complainant is still a member of the staff of the IAEA.
Keywords:
material damages; repatriation allowance; separation from service;
Judgment 5039
140th Session, 2025
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the communication, addressed by the IAEA to all of its staff members of British nationality, informing them that officials holding a residence permit under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union would be considered as having obtained permanent residence status in the country of their duty station (Austria), which would affect their home leave and repatriation grant entitlements as well as the privileges and immunities granted to them.
Consideration 19
Extract:
The complainant seeks an order requiring the IAEA to pay her 3,300 euros plus interest, being a quarterly lump sum she was entitled to as a VAT reimbursement for purchases of goods and services in Austria. She also seeks 6,097 euros as an estimated amount of VAT payable on the rent of her apartment. However, she does not establish the basis on which the IAEA is, itself, legally obliged to pay these amounts. She appears to assert she “is contractually entitled” to be paid these amounts. The liability in the IAEA would only arise if these were contractual obligations it had assumed. This is not established and this claim for the payment of a monetary amount should be rejected.
Keywords:
liability; material damages; privileges and immunities;
Consideration 21
Extract:
The complainant seeks an order concerning her entitlement to a repatriation grant. But whether she is entitled to the repatriation grant only arises for consideration at the date of separation […]. No occasion arises to make an order about this entitlement given that the complainant is still a member of the staff of the IAEA.
Keywords:
material damages; repatriation allowance;
Judgment 5038
140th Session, 2025
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the communication, addressed by the IAEA to all of its staff members of British nationality, informing them that officials holding a residence permit under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union would be considered as having obtained permanent residence status in the country of their duty station (Austria), which would affect their home leave and repatriation grant entitlements as well as the privileges and immunities granted to them.
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant seeks payment of 2,271.10 euros for the last home leave cycle but there is no persuasive evidence that this amount was claimed, and payment was refused. There has been no 'non-observance [...] of the Staff Regulations' which, in this respect, is foundational to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction (see Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute).
Keywords:
home leave; material damages;
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainant seeks an order requiring the IAEA to pay him 3,685 euros being a lump sum he was entitled to as VAT reimbursement for purchases of goods and services in Austria. He also seeks 990 euros as an estimated amount of VAT refunds from July 2023 to his date of separation. However, he does not establish the basis on which the IAEA is, itself, legally obliged to pay these amounts. The liability in the IAEA would only arise if these were contractual obligations it had assumed. This is not established and this claim for the payment of a monetary amount should be rejected.
Keywords:
liability; material damages; privileges and immunities;
Judgment 5037
140th Session, 2025
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the communication, addressed by the IAEA to all of its staff members of British nationality, informing them that officials holding a residence permit under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union would be considered as having obtained permanent residence status in the country of their duty station (Austria), which would affect their home leave and repatriation grant entitlements as well as the privileges and immunities granted to them.
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainant seeks material damages for loss of earnings in the sum of 284,234 United States dollars and a related claim for the education grant in the amount of 6,068 euros. The claim for material damages is based on the premise that he was forced to resign because of the stress and anxiety relating to the decisions and 'the recalcitrance of the Agency to change its position'. However, he does not establish with probative evidence the nexus between the impugned decision and his decision to resign with sufficient clarity to justify the award of material damages as claimed. Similar considerations obtain in relation to the education grant. Both claims are refused.
Keywords:
constructive dismissal; education expenses; material 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 22
Extract:
L’Organisation admet que l’intervenant se trouve dans une situation de droit et de fait similaire à celle du requérant, et ne s’oppose pas à sa demande d’intervention. Celui-ci a droit, en conséquence, à bénéficier d’une indemnité pour tort matériel tel qu’indiqué dans le présent jugement, dont le montant doit être fixé en fonction de sa situation propre (voir par exemple, à ce sujet, le jugement 4670, au considérant 29). Selon les écritures relatives à la demande d’intervention, ce montant s’établit à la somme de 5 311 euros. Il a également droit à une indemnité pour tort moral du même montant que celle accordée au requérant. Conformément à la jurisprudence du Tribunal, il n’a en revanche pas droit à des dépens (voir par exemple, à ce sujet, les jugements 3692, au considérant 11, et 3571, au considérant 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3571, 3692, 4670
Keywords:
interveners; material damages; moral damages;
Judgment 4943
139th Session, 2025
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to summarily dismiss him on disciplinary grounds.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that the Appeals Committee concluded that the complainant had been negligent. A significant element in the complainant’s pleas is a defence of the conclusions of the Committee and, in those pleas, the complainant speaks of the contributory negligence of others. Though the complainant does not do so explicitly, clearly implicit in the approach he adopts in his pleas, is an acknowledgment that he was negligent. And while he seeks reinstatement, he allows for the possibility in the orders he seeks that reinstatement might not be feasible. The Tribunal has repeatedly said that it may refuse to make such an order if reinstatement is no longer possible or if it is inappropriate. According to the Tribunal’s case law, reinstatement is inadvisable when an employer has valid reasons for losing confidence in an employee (see, in particular, Judgments 4579, consideration 7, 4310, consideration 13, and 3364, consideration 27). There is little room to doubt this is so in relation to the complainant. In these circumstances the complainant is entitled to damages for the lost opportunity of continuing in employment with the FAO though with the caveat that he may ultimately have been found to have participated in fraud as had been determined by the OIGI. Those damages are assessed in the sum of 20,000 United States dollars.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3364, 4310, 4579
Keywords:
fraud; loss of opportunity; material damages; reinstatement;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; disciplinary measure; flaw; fraud; internal appeals body; material damages; moral damages; motivation; negligence;
Judgment 4942
139th Session, 2025
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; disciplinary measure; flaw; fraud; internal appeals body; material damages; moral damages; motivation; negligence;
Judgment 4930
139th Session, 2025
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to terminate his appointment at the end of his probationary period.
Consideration 9
Extract:
In conclusion, not only did the Secretary-General fail to provide clear and cogent reasons for departing from the Appeal Board’s opinion, he also committed an error of law concerning the time granted to the complainant for improving his performance having regard to the date in which the workplan was established. Accordingly, the impugned decision, as well as the decision to terminate the complainant’s employment at the end of the probationary period, are unlawful and they will be set aside. Concerning the complainant’s claims for reinstatement or, in the alternative, the award of material damages, the Tribunal holds that reinstatement is not appropriate in light of the fact that he had been appointed for a two-year fixed-term contract as from 6 January 2020 and in light of the effluxion of time. The complainant lost a valuable opportunity to successfully conclude his probationary period and to remain in service until the expiry of his two-year fixed-term contract. As a result, he is entitled to an award of material damages which the Tribunal will assess taking into account the possibility that his employment might have been lawfully terminated at the end of his probationary period. The Tribunal finds it fair and just to award material damages in the sum of 50,000 Swiss francs.
Keywords:
material damages; reinstatement;
Judgment 4916
139th Session, 2025
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests her Performance Appraisal Report for the period from 1 November 2019 to 31 October 2020 and the decision not to renew her appointment due to unsatisfactory performance and loss of trust.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant seeks material damages equivalent to the remuneration, including benefits and allowances, she would have received had her contract been renewed for one year. It should be noted that the complainant held a temporary appointment which, according to its terms and the Tribunal’s case law, carried no expectation of renewal (see, for example, Judgments 4588, consideration 19, 4587, consideration 19, 4462, consideration 18, 3580, consideration 6, and 3448, consideration 7). Even if the complainant’s 2020 PAR had been properly conducted and there was no flaw in the procedure, there is no guarantee that it would have resulted in a favourable outcome for the renewal of her appointment. However, since the complainant lost a valuable opportunity to have her contract renewed, she is entitled to material damages, which the Tribunal assesses in the amount of 30,000 euros.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3448, 3580, 4462, 4587, 4588
Keywords:
loss of opportunity; material damages; mistake of law; non-renewal of contract; performance report;
Judgment 4915
139th Session, 2025
International Bureau of Weights and Measures
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the BIPM’s decision to close his harassment complaint and to reject his requests for compensation.
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant’s claim for material and moral damages may only be allowed, if the complainant prevails on his substantive pleas. Inasmuch as the present complaint succeeds on procedural grounds and the case will be remitted to the BIPM, his claim for material and moral damages remains in abeyance. At this stage, the complainant is entitled to moral damages only for the breach of due process stemming from the conflict of interest. The Tribunal deems it just and fair to award him 15,000 euros in moral damages in this respect.
Keywords:
breach; case sent back to organisation; conflict of interest; due process; material damages; moral damages;
Judgment 4840
138th Session, 2024
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to renew her fixed-term contract due to underperformance after placing her on a three-month Performance Improvement Plan.
Consideration 34
Extract:
[T]he complainant claims material damages in an amount equal to two years’ salary, benefits, step increases, pension contributions, and all other entitlements and emoluments that she would have received had she not been wrongfully separated from service. This claim is not substantiated in the complainant’s proceedings be it in terms of years sought or of her expectations within the Organization. Given that any fixed-term contract the complainant ever held with IOM never exceeded one year and that the total length of her services with the Organization lasted approximately five years, the Tribunal considers that this claim is not justified and overstated in the circumstances.
An award of material damages in an amount equivalent to nine months’ salary, including benefits, entitlements and emoluments, represents a fair and reasonable compensation in the present case. IOM will be ordered to pay this amount to the complainant, plus interest at the rate of 5 per cent per annum from 1 November 2019, less any amounts she may have earned from other employment during that period of nine months beginning on 1 November 2019.
Keywords:
breach; burden of proof; due process; fixed-term; injury; material damages; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 4839
138th Session, 2024
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject her sexual harassment claim.
Consideration 11
Extract:
Where the investigation into a harassment complaint is found to be flawed, the Tribunal will ordinarily remit the matter to the organisation concerned so that a new investigation can be conducted (see, for example, Judgment 4313, consideration 8). However, the complainant asks the Tribunal not to refer the matter back to IOM, but to award her material and moral damages. In view of this and the time that has elapsed, the Tribunal considers it inappropriate to refer the case back to IOM.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4313
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; damages; flaw; investigation; material damages; moral damages; remand;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
|
