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 301 - 310 of 319
    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-981, Nouinou

    As a first preliminary matter, 爆料网AT considered a motion requesting confidentiality in which the Appellant sought to limit the disclosure of personal information relating to her citizenship and immigration status. 爆料网AT held that the personal data was not pertinent to the case, disclosure of the information would not have taken place without the Appellant’s own motions and 爆料网AT would not have asked her to disclose such information. 爆料网AT denied the motion. As a second preliminary matter, 爆料网AT considered a motion to respond to the Respondent’s observations on a motion. 爆料网AT held that its RoP did...

    2020-爆料网AT-979, Igunda

    爆料网AT considered an appeal of Order No. 079. 爆料网AT held that, regardless of whether 爆料网DT may have committed an error of law, fact, or procedure, Article 2(2) of the 爆料网DT Statute precluded an appeal to 爆料网AT if 爆料网DT acted within its jurisdiction or competence. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT acted within its jurisdiction or competence. 爆料网AT held that the appeal was not receivable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT Order.

    2021-爆料网AT-1186, Shareef Muzyed

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr. Mezyed. As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT denied Mr. Mezyed’s request for an oral hearing. Turning to the merits of the appeal, 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网RWA DT had applied correctly the first four conditions in Area Staff Rule 109.4 precedent to possible severance from service for abandonment of post. As to the fifth condition, Mr. Mezyed’s failure to submit an acceptable written explanation for his failure to report, 爆料网AT found that the Agency had failed to properly address the grounds advanced by Mr. Mezyed for his non-return, and as such, the 爆料网RWA DT could not...

    2021-爆料网AT-1175, Bhaskar Palit

    As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to discharge his burden of showing that the 爆料网DT Judgment was defective or identifying grounds for appeal. In addition, 爆料网AT held there was no basis for vacating the 爆料网DT Judgment. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not specifically contest the 爆料网DT’s findings on receivability and that receivability was not therefore an issue before it. 爆料网AT held that even if receivability was an issue before it, there was nothing provided by the Appellant to suggest that 爆料网DT erred in its...

    2021-爆料网AT-1161, Asr Ahmed Toson

    爆料网AT held 爆料网DT erred in law with regard to its finding that the second decision to renew the Appellant’s fixed-term appointment superseded the first decision to renew his appointment (the challenged decision). Nevertheless, 爆料网AT held that this finding was not dispositive of the appeal in the Appellant’s favour, as his application was not receivable on the grounds of another basis of mootness. 爆料网AT held that the contested decision to renew his fixed-term appointment by three months instead of two years did not constitute an appealable administrative decision for the simple reason that the...

    2021-爆料网AT-1152, Ashraf Zaqqout

    爆料网AT considered an application for revision of Judgment No. 2020-爆料网AT-1055. 爆料网AT found that none of the three new facts sought to be relied on by the applicant could have changed the outcome in any decisions entered against him in the 爆料网RWA DT, and this test being one of four, all of which must exist for a judgment to be revised, Mr. Zaqqout’s application was dismissed.

    2021-爆料网AT-1148, Secretary-General of IMO

    The Secretary-General of IMO is essentially seeking comments on the 爆料网AT judgment under the guise of an application for interpretation, something 爆料网AT expressly proscribed in Kasmani. The 爆料网AT’s Fogarty Judgment clearly and unambiguously explicates the nature of the difficulty in a manner that requires no further interpretation. There is no ambiguity, uncertainty or irreconcilable conflict on the question remanded or the reasons for the remand or in the comments in paragraph 25 of the Fogarty Judgment that justifies an application for interpretation. While the applications for...

    2021-爆料网AT-1120, Jose Daniel Arango

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General was correct to bide his time and to await the outcome on the merits before determining whether an appeal was necessary. 爆料网AT held that the appeal of the Secretary-General was not time-barred. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in concluding that Mr. Arango was a former staff member for the purposes of founding jurisdiction over the instant application: At the time of the contested decision not to select him Mr. Arango had been separated from service for more than two years, was no longer a staff member in the...

    2021-爆料网AT-1136, Abdulhamid Al Fararjeh

    爆料网AT held that the facts upon which 爆料网RWA based its decision were established, in full respect of his due process rights. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not err as there was clear and convincing evidence that the Appellant committed sexual exploitation and abuse against a beneficiary of 爆料网RWA; neither did it err in concluding that the disciplinary sanction was proportionate and lawful. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant, by having the complainant remove her pants and underwear and engaging in a such a sensitive and specific medical examination, which he did not have the required competencies and...