2011-爆料网AT-109, Hastings
爆料网AT found that there was no evidence of damages or injuries in this case. 爆料网AT reaffirmed the principle that an award for moral damages must be supported by specific evidence.
Former Staff Rules
Showing 41 - 50 of 276
2011-爆料网AT-108, Ajdini et al.
爆料网AT considered an appeal of 爆料网DT Order No. 50 (GVA/2010) by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that the issue under consideration was settled, as 爆料网AT had consistently held that 爆料网DT had no jurisdiction to waive deadlines for management evaluation or administrative review. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred on a question of law in determining that it had the authority to waive the deadlines for administrative review. 爆料网AT allowed the appeal and set aside the 爆料网DT Order.
2011-爆料网AT-105, Fuentes
爆料网AT considered appeals from both the Secretary-General and Ms Fuentes. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly found her appeal regarding an investigation by OIOS to be time-barred. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly held that it was the special procedure under Administrative Instruction ST/AI/1998/9 and not former Staff Rule 111(2)(a) that applied to appeals of classification decisions and that the Administration had failed to respond to Ms Fuentes’ appeal against the reclassification decision. 爆料网AT dismissed both appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
2012-爆料网AT-271, Cremades
爆料网AT held that the appeal was without merit and that the request for management evaluation was filed in an untimely manner. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that informal resolution efforts had been taken which could extend the time limit. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant had not requested such an extension of the time limit. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly decided that the request for management evaluation was not receivable as it was time-barred. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
2012-爆料网AT-270, Marshall
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Mr Marshall. Regarding the Secretary-General’s appeal, 爆料网AT held that any reasonable or logical reading of Staff Regulation 1. 2 mandated the Organisation to investigate when the Complainant, in her letter of 15 August 2005, called Mr Marshall’s conduct into question. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had erred in law and fact in determining otherwise. 爆料网AT held that there was no basis in law or fact for the pronouncements made by 爆料网DT in paragraphs 112-113 of its judgment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had applied an unduly restrictive...
2012-爆料网AT-260, Rahman
爆料网AT held that it was not in dispute that the Appellant did not submit a request for management evaluation until more than one year after he had been notified that he had not been selected for the post in question. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT, under Article 11.1 of the 爆料网DT Statute, was obliged to issue a judgment in writing, stating the reasons, facts, and law on which it was based. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s decisions, that the Appellant had been properly served with a notification in writing in compliance with former Staff Rule 111.2 and that Article 8.3 prohibited 爆料网DT from extending the deadline for...
2012-爆料网AT-247, Mushema
爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT held that, in the present case, 爆料网DT had not recorded any reasons for holding that this was indeed an exceptional case, warranting an award higher than two years’ net base salary. 爆料网AT held that the award of full salary payable between separation and the date of the 爆料网DT judgment was fraught with ambiguity and uncertainty since the staff member might have been separated from service on other non-disciplinary grounds. 爆料网AT held that it would be adequate, fair, and reasonable to award compensation in lieu of reinstatement in an amount equal to...
2012-爆料网AT-246, Mwamsaku
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General limited to the amount of compensation. 爆料网AT held that, in the present case, 爆料网DT had not recorded any reasons for holding that this was indeed an exceptional case, warranting an award higher than two years’ net base salary. 爆料网AT held that the award of full salary payable between separation and the date of the 爆料网DT judgment was fraught with ambiguity and uncertainty since the staff member might have been separated from service on other non-disciplinary grounds. 爆料网AT held that it would be adequate, fair, and reasonable to award compensation in...
2012-爆料网AT-237, Bagula
爆料网AT held that the complaints against the Appellant were very serious and intolerable for any employer. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly concluded that the case against the Appellant stood substantiated and corroborated and the evidence sufficiently supported the charge of improperly soliciting and receiving money from local people in exchange for their recruitment and service as 爆料网 staff. 爆料网AT held that during the teleconference the Appellant had produced two impostors as witnesses, who testified that they had lied to the investigators and made false allegations against the Appellant. 爆料网AT...
2012-爆料网AT-225, Scott
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s interpretation process, which led to the dismissal of the claim, was neither unreasonable nor unfair. 爆料网AT noted that the affirmation that only the purchasing power element of comparison would allow an equal pay and treatment of staff members constituted only a postulation of a certain parameter among many possible options, without real support except in terms of policy selection because other criteria could also allow that kind of equal treatment, provided that they are applied in a general and non-discriminating way. 爆料网AT noted that the comparator element adopted in the...