Receivability ratione materiae (844,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Receivability ratione materiae
Total judgments found: 3

• Judgment 4928

  
  139th Session, 2025
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject her protest against what she identified as the “violation of staff rights to sick leave, medical privacy and duty of care”.

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  Under the Tribunal’s case law, an act by an officer of an organisation constitutes an administrative decision only if it has a legal effect (see, for example, Judgments 4499, consideration 8, 3141, consideration 21, 2573, consideration 10, 1674, consideration 6(a), and 532, consideration 3).
  In the present case, the Tribunal is satisfied that the 21 August 2018 email, objectively construed, did not have any legal effect. This is because that email only informed the complainant of possible measures which would be taken later regarding work assignments but did not contain in itself an administrative decision within the meaning of that case law. The complainant’s appeal was correctly rejected on that basis and the present complaint is clearly irreceivable for the same reason.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 532, 1674, 2573, 3141, 4499
  

  Keywords:

  administrative decision; receivability ratione materiae;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; receivability ratione materiae; summary procedure;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4230

  
  129th Session, 2020
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to introduce a maximum length of employment under short-term appointments in breach of applicable rules on consultation with staff representatives.

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  The complaint is receivable insofar as the complainant is acting in his capacity as General Secretary of the UGSS and member of the SMCC and insofar as his complaint relates to the Organization’s alleged breach of its obligation to consult in good faith with the staff representative bodies prior to issuing the Circular.

  Keywords:

  receivability ratione materiae; receivability ratione personae; staff representative;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4145

  
  128th Session, 2019
  European Molecular Biology Laboratory
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to transfer one of his subordinates to another team.

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  The complainant’s assertion that as the decision “directly adversely affected” him and caused him injury, he has the requisite standing as stated in the case law to bring the present complaint is also unfounded. Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute has been interpreted to require that for a complaint to be receivable the staff member must have a cause of action and the impugned decision must be one that, by its nature, is subject to challenge. As the Tribunal explained in Judgment 3426, consideration 16, in addition to the requirement that the complainant must be an official of the defendant organization or other person as provided in paragraph 6 of the Article, paragraph 5 requires that a complaint “must relate to [a] decision involving the terms of a staff member’s appointment or the provisions of the Staff Regulations”. In Judgment 4048, consideration 5, the Tribunal elaborated that “to invoke the Tribunal’s jurisdiction, it must be a decision adversely affecting the complainant concerning either rights, privileges, obligations or duties arising under the provisions of staff regulations or the complainant’s terms of appointment” and that “[t]he complaint must allege non-observance of either or both (see Article II of the Tribunal’s Statute)”. As the complaint does not relate to a decision involving the complainant’s terms of appointment or the provisions of the EMBL’s Staff Rules and Regulations, it does not disclose a cause of action and is irreceivable.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3426, 4048
  

  Keywords:

  cause of action; competence of tribunal; receivability of the complaint; receivability ratione materiae;