Contra proferentem (834,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Contra proferentem
Total judgments found: 3

• Judgment 4921

  
  139th Session, 2025
  European Southern Observatory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests ESO’s decision not to apply the ceilings defined in its Staff Rules and Regulations to the cost-of-living differential of the monthly household and children’s allowances paid to him.

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  The foregoing submissions accord with the Tribunal’s case law, stated, for example, in consideration 3 of Judgment 4639, that it is a basic rule of interpretation that words are to be given their obvious and ordinary meaning and that words must be construed objectively in their context and in keeping with their purport and purpose, but that should an ambiguity remain in the relevant provision after this method of construction is applied, the regulations or rules of an international organisation must in principle be construed in favour of the interests of its staff and not those of the organisation itself. As the Joint Advisory Appeals Board (JAAB) correctly concluded, the Tribunal holds that the complainant’s submission that the abovementioned operative words in Annex R A 5, 5.03 of the Staff Rules and Regulations are clear and unambiguous. Those words defined the applicable ceiling for the cost-of-living differential for the complainant’s household and children’s allowances, which should have been reflected in the complainant’s payslips […].

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4639
  

  Keywords:

  allowance; contra proferentem; interpretation of rules; staff regulations and rules;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  allowance; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contra proferentem; cost-of-living weighting; interpretation of rules; practice;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4057

  
  127th Session, 2019
  World Trade Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reduce her pension on the basis of a reduction of the consumer price index.

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  The rule or principle of interpretation is that a clause in a document should be interpreted in favour of the party who did not draft the clause (in this case the staff), and not in favour of the party who did draft the clause, sought the inclusion of the clause or possibly in whose interests the clause was intended to operate (that is to say contra proferentem). However this rule, whatever its width, only operates in circumstances where the clause is ambiguous (see, for example, Judgment 1755, consideration 12, and, more recently, Judgment 3355, consideration 16).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1755, 3355
  

  Keywords:

  contra proferentem; interpretation; interpretation of rules; staff member's interest;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3434

  
  119th Session, 2015
  European Patent Organisation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The Tribunal found that the EPO had correctly concluded that the complainant was not entitled to the reimbursement he claimed for the school fees of his children.

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  The applicable principles for the interpretation of the EPO’s provisions for the reimbursement of school fees have been set out, for example, in Judgment 3310, under 7, as follows:
  “The primary rule is that words in a statutory text are to be given their obvious and ordinary meaning and any ambiguity in a provision should be construed in favour of staff and not of the Organisation (see Judgment 2276, consideration 4). The construction of any instrument of this character entails the Tribunal endeavouring to ascertain the objectives sought to be achieved by the instrument having regard to the language used.”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2276, 3310
  

  Keywords:

  contra proferentem; interpretation of rules;