爆料网

爆料网 Charter

  • Article 1.3
  • Article 1.4
  • Article 100
  • Article 100.1
  • Article 101
  • Article 101.1
  • Article 101.2
  • Article 101.3
  • Article 103
  • Article 105
  • Article 105.2
  • Article 17
  • Article 2.7
  • Article 55
  • Article 57
  • Article 63
  • Article 76
  • Article 8
  • Article 92
  • Article 97
  • Article 98
  • Chapter VII
  • Chapter XV
  • Charter of the United Nations, Article 101
  • Preamble
    • Showing 91 - 100 of 202
    2020-爆料网AT-1071, Krioutchkov

    爆料网AT held that the Organisation correctly excluded the Appellant from the recruitment process for not meeting the minimum education requirement, as he had not entered his educational credential accurately. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant had had access to the Inspira Applicant’s Manual and World Higher Education Database, which was embedded into Inspira. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s argument that 爆料网DT failed to implement the 爆料网AT judgment to carry out additional fact-finding on the issue of whether Inspira reflected the variety of the educational systems of all Member States equally in 2016...

    2020-爆料网AT-1066, Krioutchkov

    爆料网AT noted that, at the time of applying for the position, information was available to the Appellant in the form of the Inspira Applicant’s Manual, including the World Higher Education Database list, which meant that he had the information about how to reflect his degree correctly in his electronic application and that an inaccurate application would render him ineligible for the position. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not make any errors of law or fact in dismissing the Appellant’s challenge of the decision not to consider or select him for the position. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the...

    2020-爆料网AT-1054, Ross

    On the Applicant’s claim that 爆料网DT committed an error of procedure by not allowing him to submit an affidavit from his former supervisor, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT properly exercised its broad discretion under Article 18(1) of its Rules of Procedure in determining the admissibility as well as the evidentiary value and weight of the proffered affidavit. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s conclusions were consistent with the evidence. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not meet the burden of proof for demonstrating an error in the judgment such as to warrant its reversal. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the...

    2020-爆料网AT-1030, Applicant

    爆料网AT held that there was no legal basis to conclude that subjecting the Appellant to the managerial or supervisory authority of the director was unlawful. 爆料网AT held that the decision to refuse a proposed restructuring of the line of supervision to accommodate the Appellant rested on rational legitimate concerns about the managerial prerogative, structural coherence, and institutional integrity. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

    2020-爆料网AT-996, Oglesby

    爆料网AT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2019-爆料网AT-914 from Mr Oglesby. 爆料网AT held that Mr Oglesby failed to establish the required grounds for a revision of judgment, namely the discovery of a decisive fact that was, at the time the judgment was rendered, unknown to 爆料网AT and the party applying for revision. 爆料网AT noted that it had concluded in the impugned judgment that it was unable to apply the 爆料网 Charter or the UDHR directly, or strike down clear 爆料网JSPF Regulations. 爆料网AT opined that it was within the combined powers of the 爆料网JSPF, the Secretary-General and the General...

    2020-爆料网AT-985, Mohamed

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not demonstrate that the 爆料网DT judgment was defective or that the 爆料网DT erred in considering that the selected candidate met the minimum educational requirements and the work experience required for the job. Emphasizing the broad discretion of the Secretary-General and that it was not the role of 爆料网DT to substitute its own decision for that of the Secretary-General, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was not manifestly unreasonable in deciding that the recommendation approved by the Secretary-General was based on an entire process and the experience of the candidates. 爆料网AT held...

    2021-爆料网AT-1179, Moncef Khane

    爆料网AT made several findings on the appeal. First, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err when it did not hold a case management or substantive hearing on the issues. 爆料网AT agreed that the first instance Judge is in the best position to decide what is appropriate for the fair and expeditious disposal of a case and to do justice to the parties. Second, 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT that the administrative action was not a disguised disciplinary sanction. 爆料网AT also found that the USG had the authority to transfer the appellant to a different unit to address a political situation. However, 爆料网AT disagreed with...

    2021-爆料网AT-1166, Boubacar Dieng

    爆料网AT first agreed with the 爆料网DT that the abolition of post was not a reviewable administrative decision. Second, 爆料网AT ruled there was no evidence of improper motives regarding the non-renewal of the staff member’s appointment. The staff member’s main contention on appeal was that his post should have been subject to a Comparative Review Process (CRP) instead of being identified as a “dry cut.” A “dry cut” happens when a post is unique and can therefore be abolished without a comparative review. The staff member claims his post should have undergone a CRP because there were other P-5 political...

    2021-爆料网AT-1134, Anis Basil AlMousa

    爆料网AT considered an appeal of the Judgment on the merits and a cross-appeal from the Commissioner-General on the receivability finding. 爆料网AT held that the cross-appeal was receivable, however 爆料网AT dismissed it in light of the Commissioner-General’s request that his cross-appeal not be examined should the appeal be dismissed and secondly, because 爆料网AT did not detect any error in the 爆料网RWA DT’s order which found that the application was receivable. On the merits of the appeal, 爆料网AT held that Mr. AlMousa failed to establish any error in the 爆料网RWA DT Judgment, although his appeal undoubtedly...

    2021-爆料网AT-1100, Marius Mihail Russo-Got

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s interpretation of the totality of the evidence on the record was reasonable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly found that Mr Russo-Got was Candidate A for the P-3 test and Candidate F for the P-4 test and that 爆料网OPS had submitted contemporaneous documentation showing that he was not recommended because he had failed the written assessment for the two tests. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT properly reviewed the contested decisions in accordance with the applicable law.