爆料网

Search

By Tribunal
By Registry Location
Issuance Type
Date of Judgement/Order
More info
By Tribunal
By Registry Location
Issuance Type
Date of Judgement/Order
More info
??? 3201 - 3220 ?? 4374
?????
2013-爆料网AT-339, Tsoneva

爆料网AT considered both an appeal by Ms Tsoneva and an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT disagreed with the 爆料网DT’s interpretation of the prescribed procedure, leading to the discontinuation of Ms Tsoneva’s position, noting that there was no requirement that the staff member’s meeting with the manager must take place after the staff member had received a written notification or that the manager must consult a concerned staff member. 爆料网AT held that the Director complied with the prescribed procedure by discussing the matter with Ms Tsoneva, informing her in writing of his intention to request...

2013-爆料网AT-340, Dannan

爆料网AT held that the appeal was not based on any of the required grounds. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT properly discharged its duty to examine whether the procedure laid down in the applicable Staff Regulations and Rules had been followed and whether the Appellant had been given fair and adequate consideration. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT correctly placed upon the Appellant the onus of showing by clear and convincing evidence that he had been denied a fair chance of being promoted. 爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网RWA DT’s observation that it was not enough for the Appellant to merely allege favouritism and yet...

2013-爆料网AT-341, Appellee

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by the staff member. 爆料网AT concurred with the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal which held that, unless the Administration had made an express promise that gave a staff member an expectance of extension, or unless it abused its discretion, or was motivated by discriminatory or improper grounds in not extending an appointment, the non-renewal of a staff member’s fixed-term appointment was not unlawful. 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT’s finding that the staff member had suffered no material harm from the series of renewals for short...

2013-爆料网AT-334, Konate

爆料网AT held that, whilst not all the allegations of misconduct with which the staff member was charged were proven, it was established by 爆料网DT that the Appellant failed to apply formal methods of solicitation in respect of contracts, in violation of 爆料网FPA Financial Regulations, Rules and Procurement Procedures and also failed to refer a contract to the 爆料网FPA Headquarters Contracts Review Committee, in violation of further norms. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not established any errors of fact or law warranting reversal of the impugned judgment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly declined to accept...

2013-爆料网AT-325, Servas

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err by not considering the various provisions of Staff Rule 3. 18. 爆料网AT held that a staff member’s failure to meet the requirements of either Annex IV or Staff Rule 3. 18 precluded the staff member from being eligible for a repatriation grant and, since the Appellant did not meet the requirement of Annex IV, that she relocate after separation from service, there was no need for 爆料网DT to consider whether she met the conditions for eligibility under Staff Rule 3. 18(c). 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in determining the Appellant was not eligible for a repatriation...

2013-爆料网AT-326, Jibara

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Commissioner-General and a cross-appeal by Mr Jibara. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT lacked jurisdiction to decide on the scope of the Oslo Accords signed by Israel and the Palestinian National Authority or the legality of the detention and imprisonment. 爆料网AT recalled that it was not the role of 爆料网DT to substitute its own decision for that of the Administration. 爆料网AT recalled that, having established misconduct and the seriousness of the incident, 爆料网AT cannot review the level of a sanction imposed except in cases of obvious absurdity or flagrant arbitrariness. 爆料网AT...

2013-爆料网AT-327, Tiwathia

爆料网AT noted that appeals from 爆料网DT decisions on suspensions of action will only be receivable if 爆料网DT, in adjudicating such applications, exceeded its competence or jurisdiction. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT’s legal and factual reasoning fell entirely within its competence and jurisdiction. 爆料网AT held that, although the Appellant’s claims addressed the merits of the 爆料网DT judgment, they did not amount to claims that the 爆料网DT exceeded its competence or jurisdiction. 爆料网AT held that the appeal was not receivable. 爆料网DT dismissed the appeal.

2013-爆料网AT-329, Perez-Soto

Noting the broad discretion of 爆料网DT with respect to case management, 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the contention that 爆料网DT erred on a matter of procedure either by not affording the Appellant a second case management hearing or by not sanctioning the Secretary-General for his failure to submit documents. On the Appellant’s submission that 爆料网DT failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by not addressing his right to a current job classification and the closing of his “evaluative past, including the issue of his performance appraisal”, 爆料网AT noted that these matters had been...

2013-爆料网AT-330, Nwuke

爆料网AT considered two appeals, one against Order No. 103 (NBI/2012) and one against judgment No. 爆料网DT/2012/116. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not established any excess of jurisdiction or competence on the part of 爆料网DT; rather, his claims addressed the merits of the 爆料网DT decision. 爆料网AT noted that even if the 爆料网DT had erred in law or fact and as also alleged in the case, committed an error of procedure, this did not instance any excess of jurisdiction or competence on its part such as would entitle the Appellant to bypass the exception to the right to appeal set out in Article 2(2) of the 爆料网DT...

2013-爆料网AT-331, Faraj

爆料网AT held that, given the written instructions provided to the Appellant, it was completely understandable that he proceeded to request again the review of the contested decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT erred when it found that he ought not to have done so and could not claim to have been legitimately misled as to the appeals procedure. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA’s holding that the Appellant should have known the applicable legal framework and filed his appeal on time was unsustainable. 爆料网AT noted that the Commissioner-General did not dispute the Appellant’s claim that the 爆料网RWA Area Staff Rules...

2013-爆料网AT-332, McCluskey

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not commit an error of fact or law when it concluded that the difference of treatment between the Appellant and his former colleagues who had undergone a competitive selection process was lawful. 爆料网AT held that it was reasonable and lawful to treat them differently at the time of deciding about the possible extension of his fixed-term appointment because equality meant not only the equal treatment of equals but also the unequal treatment of unequal. 爆料网AT held that there was no flaw in the motivation of the impugned judgment that could result in a manifestly unreasonable...

2013-爆料网AT-350, Farr

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General limited to 爆料网DT’s competence with regards to the nature of the redress granted to Ms Farr. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT exceeded its competence in ordering that Ms Farr’s name be placed on the roster because the legal consequence of the annulment of the selection procedure was restricted to placing the staff member in the same position she would have been in if the illegality had not occurred. 爆料网AT held that, to afford Ms Farr proper redress, she should be allowed to take a second oral exam in French, with adequate assurances concerning the...

2013-爆料网AT-352, Cohen

爆料网AT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2011-爆料网AT-131 by Ms Cohen. 爆料网AT held that none of the grounds for revision set forth by Ms Cohen met the requirements of Article 11(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute or Article 24 of the 爆料网AT Rules of Procedure. 爆料网AT held that none of the grounds provided were new facts, but rather they were new legal arguments and an attempt by Ms Cohen to re-litigate her case and complain about 爆料网AT reducing the compensation awarded. 爆料网AT dismissed the application for revision.

2013-爆料网AT-351, Ghahremani

爆料网AT considered Mr Gharemani’s request for revision of judgment No. 2011-爆料网AT-171. 爆料网AT held that the request was a disguised way to criticise the judgment or to expose grounds to disagree with it, following a style of cross-reference to other documents that made it mostly incomprehensible and indirectly violated the page limitation for such an application. 爆料网AT held that there was no reason why Mr Gharemani could not have filed his petition for revision within 30 days of the discovery of the facts as provided for in Article 11(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the request was time-barred...

爆料网DT/2013/092, Terragnolo

The decision was taken on the grounds that the Applicant had failed to submit the essay required by the vacancy announcement. The Applicant argued that the decision was taken in retaliation of his activities as staff representative. The Tribunal found that the decision not to convoke the Applicant to the examination was justified since he failed to submit the one-page essay in French, which was clearly an eliminatory requirement indicated in the vacancy announcement. The 爆料网DT further found that the Applicant did not submit evidence in support of his claim that the decision was taken in...

爆料网DT/2013/093, Terragnolo

The decision was taken on the grounds that the Applicant did not fulfill the educational requirements. The Applicant argued that the decision was made in retaliation of his activities as staff representative. The 爆料网DT found that the decision was illegal since documentary evidence showed that the Administration applied the notion of “public administration” randomly and that based on the Applicant’s educational credentials, he ought to have been invited to participate in the examination in question. The 爆料网DT found that the Applicant did not submit conclusive evidence that the decision was...

爆料网DT/2013/091, Clark and Gilbert

The Applicants argue that the facts were not established and that their actions did not amount to misconduct, since they were acting in self-defense or in defense of someone else. The Tribunal noted that video evidence, i.e. hotel security camera footage, constituted the only reliable evidence to establish the facts in the instant case and concluded that the Applicants, who were on an official mission at the material time, initiated the dispute and the physical altercation and did not act in self-defense when they assaulted a security guard. Accordingly, the 爆料网DT found that the facts...

爆料网DT/2013/090, Candusso

The 爆料网DT found that, having waited for approximately one year and a half to raise claims regarding the alleged lack of access to the United Nations cafeteria facilities, the Applicant acquiesced to the arrangements put in place by the Respondent in view of the renovation-related requirements. The 爆料网DT further found that, in view of the CMP-related requirements that necessitated the move to the Madison Building, the Respondent put in place alternative measures that were neither unreasonable nor unfair. The 爆料网DT rejected the application.