{"id":143,"date":"2020-10-28T10:31:00","date_gmt":"2020-10-28T10:31:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/?p=143"},"modified":"2023-08-25T19:14:40","modified_gmt":"2023-08-25T19:14:40","slug":"sipos-szabo-v-nato-and-the-belgian-state","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/?p=143","title":{"rendered":"Sipos Szabo v NATO and the Kingdom of Belgium"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h6>Brussels Labour Court of Appeal, Sipos Szabo v North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Kingdom of Belgium, 2018\/AB\/22, Nr. 28 October 2020<\/h6>\n\n\n\n<pre class=\"wp-block-code\"><code>ECLI:BE:CTBRL:2019:ARR.20190207.11 <\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\n<p>The case concerned a medical doctor who claimed an entitlement under NATO\u2019s Civilian Personnel Regulation (CPR) to an indefinite contract and had brought its claims before NATO\u2019s Administrative Tribunal. NATO\u2019s Tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction to entertain the claims because the plaintiff concluded successive sui generis contracts that NATO was entitled to offer. Those contracts did not bring the plaintiff within the realm of the CPR, while the jurisdiction of NATO\u2019s Tribunal is limited to alleged breaches of the CPR. The plaintiff brought her claims before Belgian courts, host nation of NATO, and argued on the basis of ECtHR case-law relating to the interplay between the right to a judge and International Organizations\u2019 immunity that NATO\u2019s immunity must be set aside because she did not have access to an effective remedy within NATO\u2019s legal system as NATO\u2019s Tribunal declared itself without jurisdiction and arguably did not consider the merits of her claims. NATO\u2019s immunity was upheld before Brussels\u2019 Labour Tribunal and, on appeal, by the Brussels Labour Court of Appeal which agreed with NATO that the plaintiff\u2019s argument was based on a wrong premise, that NATO\u2019s internal justice system was effective and independent, that the plaintiff was heard and received an articulated legal answer to her claims following due process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-file\"><a href=\"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/id_krlqijbc.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button\" download>Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\"\/>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Brussels Labour Court of Appeal, Sipos Szabo v North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Kingdom of Belgium, 2018\/AB\/22, Nr. 28 October 2020 The case concerned a medical doctor who claimed an entitlement under NATO\u2019s &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[6],"tags":[24,25,18,29,31,30],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=143"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":887,"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143\/revisions\/887"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=143"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=143"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ilbc.be\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=143"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}