These judgments concern compensation:

• No. 22: 25 June 1997 (PDF, 65kb) - The applicant alleged that the Organisation had mismanaged the Provident Fund. The Tribunal had first of all to decide whether it had jurisdiction to hear the case.

• No. 37: 9 December 1998 (PDF, 150kb) - The Secretary-General decided not to reinstate the applicant following the Tribunal’s judgment in Case No. 32, and asked the Tribunal to fix instead an amount of compensation. The Tribunal also determined the modalities of payment.

• No. 39: 21 June 1999 (PDF, 158kb) - The Tribunal had to decide on the rules applicable and procedure to be followed in a request for compensation for prejudice suffered by reason of an occupational disease (alleged exposure to asbestos).

• No. 42: 15 October 1999 (PDF, 222kb) - The applicant filed an appeal for interpretation of the term “salary” for the purposes of executing the Tribunal’s judgment in Case No. 37.

• Nos. 43-46: 16 March 2000 (PDF, 181kb) - Four officials of the International Energy Agency challenged the refusal of their applications to benefit from the Special Departure and Renewal Programme.

• No. 57: 2 December 2004 (PDF, 170kb) - The applicant challenged the decision by the Secretary-General not to withdraw or modify the decision of the Governing Board of the IEA refusing to compensate the applicant for loss of national pension income. The Tribunal discussed its jurisdiction in relation to the principal and subsidiary claims submitted by the applicant.

• No. 63: 24 February 2009 (PDF, 238kb) - The applicant asked for compensation for the prejudice she claimed to have suffered as a result of harassment and of decisions refusing her requests for promotion. The Tribunal discussed the admissibility of the application.
   
• No. 68: 15 March 2011 (PDF, 232kb) - The applicant, whose fixed-term appointment came to an end while her health condition resulting from a work-accident was not settled,  asks the Tribunal  to annul the decision of the Secretary-General rejecting her request for renewal of her appointment and to grant her payment of her salary for the period comprised between the end of her contract and the date of consolidation of her state of health. She also claims damages on the basis of the financial, physical and moral injuries caused.

• No. 70: 26 March 2012 (PDF, 221kb) - The applicant – the same as in Case No. 68 – claims damage, in addition to the indemnities already received in respect of injuries following a work accident, on the basis of the financial, physical and moral injuries caused by the Organisation whose negligence would have prevented the applicant from rapid recovery.  

• No. 72: 6 May 2013 (PDF, 225kb) - The applicant challenged the Secretary-General’s decision to reassign her to a position of the same category and grade as the previous one without following the established procedure, pretending that her previous post had been suppressed beforehand 

• No. 91: 1st February 2019 (PDF, 322kb) - The Applicant – the same as in Case No. 73 - asks the Administrative Tribunal to annul the decision of the Secretary-General to terminate his appointment and requests his reinstatement within the OECD and a compensation in reparation of moral prejudice suffered ; or failing his reinstatement, a compensation of 4 years salary in addition to one year salary as moral damages, including pension entitlements. The Applicant seeks as well monetary compensation in reimbursement of the cost incurred in the proceedings. This application follows the decision of the Administrative Tribunal of 7 February 2014 

• No. 99: 8 November 2021 (PDF, 236kb) - The applicant asks the Administrative Tribunal to annul the decision of the Secretray-General refusing her additional compensation, following an accident recognised as a work accident.