±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that, in considering an appeal filed by a former ICAO staff member, it was reviewing a decision taken by an executive authority (i. e. ICAO Secretary-General) on the basis of the conclusions and recommendations of the AJAB, and not a judgment delivered by a professional, independent court of first instance determining the issue itself through its decision, i. e., ±¬ÁÏÍøDT. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that to that extent, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute is only applicable to such an appeal insofar as, and on condition that its provisions are compatible with the judgment of an appeal directed against a decision taken by...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that AJAB¡¯s interim report did not constitute a neutral first instance process which included a written record and a written decision providing reasons, fact and law and as such, did not conform to the requirements of Article 2(10) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute or the Agreement between the ±¬ÁÏÍø and ICAO. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that at ICAO there was no neutral first instance process including a decision. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Secretary-General of ICAO, who issued the contested decision, was not neutral, but a party to proceedings. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that under such circumstances it was not satisfied that the essential...