Hintermann v Western European Union
| Jurisdiction | France |
| Date | 14 novembre 1995 |
| Court | Court of Cassation (France) |
(Lemontey, President and Rapporteur; Le Foyer de Costil, Advocate-General)
International organizations Immunity Jurisdictional immunity Dismissal of official Claim for damages for wrongful dismissal Agreement on the Status of the Western European Union, 1955, Article 4 Whether conferring jurisdictional immunity on the Western European Union The law of France
Summary:The facts:Mr Hintermann was appointed Deputy Secretary-General of the Western European Union (WEU) in 1982. Following the termination of his employment in 1988, he brought a claim before the French courts for compensation for wrongful dismissal. His claim was rejected by both the Conseil de Prud'hommes (Employment Tribunal) and the Court of Appeal of Paris on the ground that the WEU was entitled to jurisdictional immunity according to the terms of the Agreement on the Status of the WEU, 1955. The Court of Appeal also held that the claim was inadmissible because the plaintiff had not first exhausted all available remedies within the framework of the WEU since he should have asked the French Government to call a meeting of the Council of the WEU. Hintermann appealed to the Court of Cassation, arguing that the failure of the WEU to appoint an organ for the settlement of employment disputes violated Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Held:The appeal was dismissed.
Pursuant to Article 41 of the Agreement of 11 May 1955 on the Status of the WEU, National Representatives and International Staff, the WEU enjoyed jurisdictional immunity and consequently, in the absence of any waiver of that immunity by the Secretary General of the Organization, the claim before the French courts was inadmissible.
The following is the text of the judgment of the Court:
Mr Hintermann was appointed in 1982 as Deputy Secretary-General of the Western European Union (WEU) and assigned to the Permanent Weapons Committee with its seat in Paris, as Head of the International Secretariat. He instituted proceedings against the WEU before the Employment Tribunal (Conseil de Prud'hommes) of Paris for payment of compensation following the termination of his employment. In the judgment under appeal, the Court of Appeal of Paris held that the claim was inadmissible on the ground that the plaintiff had not asked the French Government to call a meeting of the Council of the WEU and...
Pour continuer la lecture
SOLLICITEZ VOTRE ESSAI