爆料网

爆料网AT RoP

  • Article 1.2
  • Article 10
  • Article 10.1
  • Article 11.3
  • Article 13
  • Article 15
  • Article 16
  • Article 16.1
  • Article 17
  • Article 17.1
  • Article 18
  • Article 18.1
  • Article 18bis
  • Article 18bis.1
  • Article 19
  • Article 2
  • Article 20
  • Article 20.2
  • Article 22
  • Article 23
  • Article 24
  • Article 25
  • Article 26
  • Article 27
  • Article 29
  • Article 29(a)
  • Article 29(b)
  • Article 3.1
  • Article 30
  • Article 31
  • Article 31.1
  • Article 4.2
  • Article 7
  • Article 7.1
  • Article 7.1(a)
  • Article 7.2
  • Article 7.3
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.1
  • Article 8.2
  • Article 8.2(b)
  • Article 8.3
  • Article 8.4
  • Article 8.6
  • Article 9
  • Article 9.4
    • Showing 271 - 280 of 319
    2019-爆料网AT-962, Amineddine

    As preliminary matters, 爆料网AT held that: (1) an oral hearing would not assist in the expeditions and fair disposal of the case, noting that the issues of jurisdiction and receivability did not require oral testimony and argument for the fair disposal of the appeal; (2) an order for production of documents was not necessary; (3) the Registry would provide an Arabic translation of the judgment; and (4) the Appellant’s in-session motion, viewed by 爆料网AT as a veiled motion for additional pleadings and a request for adjournment, was denied for lack of exceptional circumstances, noting that the...

    2019-爆料网AT-961, Wilson

    爆料网AT held that the case was distinguishable from Finniss (judgment No. 2014-爆料网AT-397) since there was no allegation of bias, discrimination, or any other kind of deteriorated or privileged relationship between the involved candidate and the Deputy CEO. 爆料网AT disagreed with 爆料网DT’s holding that the Deputy CEO should not have acted as a voting member of the assessment panel. 爆料网AT held that in order to exclude the Deputy CEO’s involvement in the selection exercise, there must be reasonable grounds and/or evidence of extraneous or improper motives, of which there was none (except unsubstantiated and...

    2019-爆料网AT-950, Diop

    爆料网AT held that the case was fully and fairly considered by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT found no error of law or fact in the 爆料网DT decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT thoroughly considered the material facts of the case at issue and found that the qualification the Appellant had attained was not the equivalent of the required first-level university degree. 爆料网AT held that there was no error of fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT conclusions were consistent with the evidence and that the Appellant did not put forward any persuasive grounds to warrant interference by 爆料网AT. 爆料网AT...

    2019-爆料网AT-948, Sonia Bezziccheri

    As a preliminary matter, in response to the Appellant’s request for interim measures, in which she requested that the Secretary-General complied with the 爆料网DT judgment insofar as it had not been appealed against, 爆料网AT denied the motion on the basis that execution should have been requested before 爆料网DT. On the Appellant’s motion to strike assertions and evidence, 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant was supplementing her appeal, and denied the motion. On the merits, 爆料网AT held that the appeal was limited to the request for further compensation, as per the Appellant’s Power of Attorney document, and...

    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-944, Ross

    爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s motion for leave to file additional pleadings on the basis that he had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s request for costs as there was no reason to believe that the submissions of the Secretary-General were not made in good faith or were an abuse of process. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not have a right to promotion but only a right to be considered for promotion. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant received full and fair consideration for the position. 爆料网AT also affirmed 爆料网DT’s application of the priority consideration...

    2019-爆料网AT-936, Diallo

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant had demonstrated no exceptional circumstances which would justify 爆料网AT exercising its discretion to file additional pleadings. 爆料网AT held that an application before 爆料网DT without a prior request for management evaluation can only be receivable if the contested administrative decision has been taken pursuant to advise from a technical body, or if the administrative decision has been taken at Headquarters in New York to impose a disciplinary or non-disciplinary measure pursuant to Staff Rule 10.2 following the completion of a disciplinary process. 爆料网AT held that the...

    2019-爆料网AT-935, Jenbere

    爆料网AT held that the appeal was entirely without merit. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct to find that the facts supporting the disciplinary measure had been established and to conclude that those facts amounted to misconduct. 爆料网AT supported the reasoning of 爆料网DT in rejecting the Appellant’s attempts at exoneration, namely that factors such as whether or not her husband was qualified for the job or the other candidate secured another position did not change the existence of a conflict of interest and the way in which the integrity of the process was compromised. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly found...

    2019-爆料网AT-918, Nadasan

    On the delay before 爆料网DT, 爆料网AT agreed that the delay was unfort爆料网ATe but held that the Applicant had not demonstrated that it was a procedural error affecting the outcome of the case. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in exercising its case management discretion when it refused the request for an oral hearing, but that this error did not affect the decision of the case. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err as there was clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant had committed sexual harassment. 爆料网AT held that the disciplinary sanction of separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice and...

    2019-爆料网AT-908, Rockcliffe

    Ms Rockcliffe filed an application for execution of 爆料网AT judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-807. 爆料网AT held that the crux of the matter for determination was whether Ms Rockcliffe’s appointment to and her removal from, the Budget Working Group (BWG) in 2018 fell within the scope of 爆料网AT’s order in the judgment. 爆料网AT held that, although 爆料网AT had not explicitly addressed the issue of conflict of interest in its judgment, it impliedly rejected it by means of applying the law in force at the time. 爆料网AT held that it was egregious that 爆料网JSPF re-submitted that the previous decision not to give Ms Rockcliffe...