爆料网

Article 14

  • Article 11
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 12
  • Article 12.2
  • Article 13
  • Article 13.1
  • Article 13.2
  • Article 13.3
  • Article 13.5
  • Article 14
  • Article 25
  • Article 29
  • Article 3.1
  • Article 3.4
  • Article 3.5
  • Article 30
  • Article 4.4
  • Article 5
  • Article 6.1
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.2
    • Showing 1 - 10 of 10
    2024-爆料网AT-1413, Khaled Hejab, et al.

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT erred in consolidating the seven cases. The consolidated cases involved unique administrative decisions, and those decisions involved neither a common administrative policy nor a common set of facts. The nature of the misconduct attributed to the staff members was not similar among the cases. The cases concerned staff from different 爆料网RWA field offices. The disciplinary measures taken were not identical among the cases, but included a wide range of penalties. The standards of proof for the misconduct alleged in case varied.

    The 爆料网AT disagreed with the...

    2024-爆料网AT-1463, AAW

    The 爆料网AT noted that the 爆料网RWA DT had ordered each party to nominate a psychiatrist, who in turn were to designate a third psychiatrist to review whether the staff member’s mental condition at the time he committed the burglary, sentencing for which had been the grounds for his separation in the interest of the Agency.The Commissioner-General failed to comply with this instruction, without explanation, thereby leaving the 爆料网RWA DT with no medical information about AAW's condition at the time of the burglary.

    The 爆料网AT found that the Commissioner-General had clearly and manifestly abused the...

    2022-爆料网AT-1290, Nael Mohammed Fares Jibril

    Mr. Jibril appealed.

    As regards the request for an oral hearing, the 爆料网AT held that the factual and legal issues arising from this appeal had already been clearly defined by the parties and there was no need for further clarification. Moreover, an oral hearing would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case, as required by Article 18(1) of the 爆料网AT Rules of Procedure. Accordingly, the request for an oral hearing is denied.

    The 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网RWA DT that the challenged administrative decision to place Mr. Jibril on Administrative Leave With Pay (ALWP) was lawful. ...

    2022-爆料网AT-1283, Ahlam Allari, Khalil Mohammad Khalaf, Rawan Hussein

    As regards the request for an oral hearing, the 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT had lawfully exercised its discretion and given a reasonable explanation for not holding an oral hearing. The 爆料网RWA DT correctly determined that the comprehensive documentary evidence before it was sufficient to render a decision without the need for an oral hearing, especially as the issue was one of receivability. Further, the appellants have not shown how the denial of the request to hold an oral hearing affected the Judgment. With respect to the issue of receivability, the 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网RWA DT and upheld...

    2014-爆料网AT-449, Thweib & Al Hasanat

    爆料网AT considered the Commissioner-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT noted that due process required both parties to be given an opportunity to present their case, and not allowing them to do so resulted in a miscarriage of justice. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网RWA DT’s exclusion of the Commissioner-General from participating in the proceedings was a clear violation of due process such as to affect the decision of the case, which must result in the judgment being annulled and the cases remanded for a hearing de novo before a different Judge. 爆料网AT noted it was, thus, not necessary to consider the other grounds of...

    2015-爆料网AT-580, Kalil

    爆料网AT considered an appeal against Order No. 057 (爆料网RWA/DT/2014) and judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2014/027. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s request for confidentiality and for the redaction of his name from the 爆料网RWA DT judgment and affirmed 爆料网RWA DT’s reasoning. 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request to submit new evidence to 爆料网AT on the basis that the Appellant did not offer any explanation as to why he was precluded from filing them previously, exceptional circumstances did not exist, and its content would not have affected the decision of the case. 爆料网AT held that it was for 爆料网RWA DT to consider that it...

    2016-爆料网AT-687, Mohanna

    爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing prior to consideration of the appeal. 爆料网AT also rejected the Appellant's claim that 爆料网RWA DT was biased in ordering that the five applications be consolidated into a single judgment. With respect to the appeal itself, 爆料网AT held that the appeal of the decisions denying disability benefits and finding the non-payment of termination claim not receivable, had no legal basis. Regarding the Appellant’s challenge to the Commissioner-General’s decision to render the findings of the medical board moot and not to pay him a disability benefit...

    2017-爆料网AT-779, Abu Hweidi et al.

    Ar爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT’s decision not to hold an oral hearing was a shortcoming since the parties had not agreed to the case being decided on the papers and the facts needed to be established by witnesses and/or further documentary evidence. On the question of bias and its possible bearing on the outcome of the selection process, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT should have engaged in a thorough examination of the facts, rather than drawing an inference. 爆料网AT held that the inference drawn by 爆料网RWA DT, that it was realistic to conclude that not all of the posts could be filled by suitable candidates...

    2021-爆料网AT-1153, Ali Abdel Mon’em Aref Al Khatib

    It was a reasonable exercise of the Commissioner-General’s discretion to determine that intentionally abusing a position of power and trust against a beneficiary of 爆料网RWA in a vulnerable situation rendered Mr. Al Khatib unfit for further service with the Agency, and separation from service without termination indemnity was neither unfair nor disproportionate to the seriousness of the offence.

    2021-爆料网AT-1116, Ashraf Ismail Abed allah Zaqqout

    The impugned 爆料网RWA DT Order clearly comes within its competence to issue appropriate case management orders. It did not exceed its competence or jurisdiction in issuing Order No. 123, and Mr. Zaqqout is not prevented from attacking the interlocutory order later if he appeals the final judgment of the 爆料网RWA DT on the merits.