爆料网

Article 2.5

  • Article 1.2(c)
  • Article 10. 9
  • Article 10.1
  • Article 10.2
  • Article 10.5
  • Article 10.5(a)
  • Article 10.5(b)
  • Article 10.6
  • Article 10.8
  • Article 10.9
  • Article 11
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.2
  • Article 11.3
  • Article 11.4
  • Article 18
  • Article 18.1
  • Article 2
  • Article 2.1
  • Article 2.1
  • Article 2.1(a)
  • Article 2.1(a)
  • Article 2.1(b)
  • Article 2.1(c)
  • Article 2.1(d)
  • Article 2.1(e)
  • Article 2.10
  • Article 2.2
  • Article 2.2(a)
  • Article 2.3
  • Article 2.4(a)
  • Article 2.4(b)
  • Article 2.5
  • Article 2.6
  • Article 2.7
  • Article 2.8
  • Article 2.9
  • Article 2.9
  • Article 2.9(a)
  • Article 2(b)
  • Article 2(c)
  • Article 2(e)
  • Article 24
  • Article 3.2
  • Article 4
  • Article 5
  • Article 6
  • Article 6.2
  • Article 7
  • Article 7.1
  • Article 7.1(c)
  • Article 7.2
  • Article 7.3
  • Article 7.4
  • Article 7.5
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.1
  • Article 8.1(c)
  • Article 8.1(d)(i)(b)
  • Article 8.2
  • Article 8.3
  • Article 9
  • Article 9.1
  • Article 9.1(a)
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.2
  • Article 9.2
  • Article 9.3
  • Article 9.4
  • Article 9.5
  • Article 9(b)
    • Showing 71 - 80 of 83
    2019-爆料网AT-946, Tosi

    Following an appeal by the Appellant and the Secretary-General, there was a further cross-appeal by the Appellant. As a preliminary issue, 爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s cross-appeal as not receivable since the Appellant has already had the opportunity to file his own independent appeal and the cross-appeal seemed to be an attempt to complement his appeal. On the Secretary-General’s appeal in Case No. 爆料网DT/NBI/2015/095 related to the issue settlement agreement, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred on a matter of law on the receivability of the application, since it based its finding on the merits as a...

    2019-爆料网AT-897, Harris

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to demonstrate any error in the finding by 爆料网DT that he had failed to meet his burden of proving that the assignment to work in Sector East was motivated by improper consideration. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT properly considered the relevant facts and the applicable law in concluding that the Administration had followed the prescribed procedures and acted in accordance with the internal law of the Organisation in separating him for abandonment of post. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant could not choose to ignore a lawful direction by the Administration to provide medical...

    2020-爆料网AT-1013, Belsito

    A telephone conversation that was suggestive of gender discrimination in the decision-making process and was raised by the Appellant in his application was ignored by 爆料网DT. 爆料网DT made an error in the procedure by failing to hold an oral hearing where witnesses could testify about that conversation. 爆料网AT remanded the matter back to a different judge of the 爆料网DT for the production of further evidence, additional findings of fact, and the issuance of a new judgment.

    2020-爆料网AT-1040, Robinson

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in the amount of compensation it awarded, having considered all relevant circumstances, including the mitigating factor of the Appellant securing new employment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not commit an error of law or make manifestly unreasonable factual findings in its award of financial damages. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in law, and followed binding 爆料网AT precedent, by refusing to award moral damages based solely on the Appellant’s testimony. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant had had the opportunity before 爆料网DT to apply to adduce the relevant evidence but had...

    2020-爆料网AT-1002, Massi

    爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s motion to file an additional pleading in the absence of any exceptional circumstances warranting it. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to seek leave from 爆料网AT to introduce additional evidence and neither adduced evidence that exceptional circumstances warranted it nor that it would serve the interests of justice or the efficient and expeditious resolution of the appeal. On the issue of execution of the 2016 爆料网DT judgment, 爆料网AT held that there was no evidence that any of the orders contained therein were not executed and therefore the application was not...

    2020-爆料网AT-1000, Ross

    爆料网AT considered: 1) three motions filed by Mr Ross, for temporary suspension of proceedings and “Comments on the Respondent’s comments”, for additional pleadings, and for submission of applicable legal norms; 2) an application to file a Friend-of-the-Court Brief by the 爆料网HCR Staff Council; 3) an appeal by Mr Ross; and 4) an appeal by the Secretary-General. Regarding the motion for temporary suspension of proceedings and “Comments on the Respondent’s comments”, 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in it since the factual circumstances of the instant case were different from those he seemed to have...

    2020-爆料网AT-990, Mpacko

    As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s daughters applications for intervention which argued that they had been deprived of their right to education due to their mother’s arbitrary separation from service, as their mother lost her only main source of income, including the education grant, and could not support their education. 爆料网AT held that, pursuant to Article 3(1) of the 爆料网DT Statute, the daughters did not fall within the categories of persons who had the standing to intervene, and denied the applications for intervention. On the merits, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed...

    2020-爆料网AT-982, Asghar

    爆料网AT held that there was no difficulty in principle regarding the admissibility of the secretly recorded conversation based on the way it was procured, even though it may have involved an element of entrapment; however, 爆料网AT was concerned that the probative value of the evidence depended upon the credibility of a person who did not testify before the 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT noted that the content of the contemporaneous emails which supported the transcript of the telephone conversation remained hearsay unless it was confirmed by the authors or recipients of the emails and that none of the authors or...

    2020-爆料网AT-1011, Abu Fardeh

    爆料网RWA DT did not exceed its competence when assessing whether the decision to convene a medical board was lawful. The decision to convene a Medical Board five months after the service-incurred-injury in order to examine his fitness for continued service was reasonable. 爆料网RWA DT erred in deciding that the decision to convene a medical board less than five months after the Appellant’s service-incurred injury was unlawful. 爆料网RWA DT erred in law and exceeded its competence by challenging the authority of the Medical Board’s conclusion without clear and convincing medical evidence, by placing...

    2021-爆料网AT-1151, Raed Mousa

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr. Mousa. On matters of procedure, 爆料网AT found that the additional documentary evidence presented on appeal was inadmissible as Mr. Mousa had failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances and had failed to seek leave to present such additional evidence as he was required to do in terms of Article 2(5) of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal. 爆料网AT found that that while Mr. Mousa had been disciplined for working while on sick leave from the Organization and without valid authorization, he on appeal again focused on the allegations of malpractice which had...