爆料网

爆料网AT Statute

  • Article 1.2(c)
  • Article 10. 9
  • Article 10.1
  • Article 10.2
  • Article 10.5
  • Article 10.5(a)
  • Article 10.5(b)
  • Article 10.6
  • Article 10.8
  • Article 10.9
  • Article 11
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.2
  • Article 11.3
  • Article 11.4
  • Article 18
  • Article 18.1
  • Article 2
  • Article 2.1
  • Article 2.1
  • Article 2.1(a)
  • Article 2.1(a)
  • Article 2.1(b)
  • Article 2.1(c)
  • Article 2.1(d)
  • Article 2.1(e)
  • Article 2.10
  • Article 2.2
  • Article 2.2(a)
  • Article 2.3
  • Article 2.4(a)
  • Article 2.4(b)
  • Article 2.5
  • Article 2.6
  • Article 2.7
  • Article 2.8
  • Article 2.9
  • Article 2.9
  • Article 2.9(a)
  • Article 2(b)
  • Article 2(c)
  • Article 2(e)
  • Article 24
  • Article 3.2
  • Article 4
  • Article 5
  • Article 6
  • Article 6.2
  • Article 7
  • Article 7.1
  • Article 7.1(c)
  • Article 7.2
  • Article 7.3
  • Article 7.4
  • Article 7.5
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.1
  • Article 8.1(c)
  • Article 8.1(d)(i)(b)
  • Article 8.2
  • Article 8.3
  • Article 9
  • Article 9.1
  • Article 9.1(a)
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.2
  • Article 9.2
  • Article 9.3
  • Article 9.4
  • Article 9.5
  • Article 9(b)
    • Showing 181 - 190 of 1006
    2023-爆料网AT-1396, Sahar Darweesh Hanjoury

    The 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s travel was not authorized pursuant to Staff Rule 7.10 because she had just one approved day of annual leave on 24 June 2021 followed by a period of R&R from the 12 July to 16 July 2021. The 爆料网AT also found that the Administration took the appropriate action by sending her on 25 July 2021 an e-mail reminding her that all the international staff members had to submit their Sudanese visa renewal application in a timely manner. The 爆料网AT held that the events that delayed the Appellant’s return to her duty station could not be construed as force majeure as they...

    2023-爆料网AT-1395, Abdurrahman Turk

    The 爆料网AT declined Mr. Turk’s request for an oral hearing, and found no error in the 爆料网DT’s decision not to order the production of additional documents.

    The 爆料网AT reaffirmed the legal framework which provides that staff members have no legitimate expectation of any renewal of their fixed-term appointments. The 爆料网AT also confirmed that the Tribunals will not interfere with the Organization’s discretion in restructuring decisions, and that the Tribunals have no authority to review General Assembly decisions related to administrative and budgetary matters. In this case, the 爆料网AT held that the...

    2023-爆料网AT-1391, AAP

    The 爆料网AT held that the decision to cancel the appointment process and initiate a new process was one which fell squarely within the discretionary authority of the Administration. Given that a new appointment process had been embarked upon, there was no longer any administrative decision alleged to be in non-compliance with AAP’s terms of appointment or contract of employment. Any dispute concerned with the initial appointment process was moot in the sense that there was no live issue in dispute which required determination by the 爆料网DT. The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT correctly dismissed AAP’s...

    2023-爆料网AT-1382, Flamur Kazazi

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT did not commit an error of procedure in its case management that affected the outcome of the case. The Appellant had a meaningful opportunity to mount a defense and to question the veracity of the statements against him. The additional witnesses that he wished to call would have been of little assistance to his case.

    The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT correctly concluded that the alleged conduct was established by clear and convincing evidence and that the Appellant’s actions, i.e., making inappropriate comments of a sexual nature in social settings, amounted to sexual...

    2023-爆料网AT-1388, Yassir Ibrahim Ali Haroun

    The 爆料网AT held that the appeal against the two interlocutory Orders became moot following the issuance of Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2022/124 and that the 爆料网DT did not err in delivering its Judgment during the pendency of that appeal. The 爆料网AT nevertheless observed that the 爆料网DT erred in law by imposing an unreasonably short period for compliance with Order No. 157 (NBI/2022). Despite this, the 爆料网AT concluded that, as the proceeding was unreceivable, this finding did not assist the Appellant in his case. With regard to Order No. 158 (NBI/2022), the 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT rightfully refused to...

    2023-爆料网AT-1381, AAQ

    The 爆料网AT observed that neither party had raised whether AAQ’s application was receivable before the 爆料网DT. The 爆料网AT nonetheless held that because this was a jurisdictional question, it was obliged to raise the issue itself. The 爆料网AT noted that pursuant to Article 2(1)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute, the staff member was obliged to identify an administrative decision that was alleged to be in non-compliance with the terms of appointment or contract of employment. Further, pursuant to established case law, the administrative decision must have both a direct and adverse effect on the employment of the...

    2023-爆料网AT-1384, Humphreys Timothy Shumba

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT committed an error of procedure such that it affected the outcome of the case in not holding an oral hearing and relying significantly on the OAIS investigation report to corroborate the truth of the events alleged by the Complainant, when there was no direct witnesses to the alleged misconduct and all the witnesses relied upon by the OAIS investigators obtained their evidence and information from the Complainant. As such, the 爆料网AT concluded that their evidence was hearsay evidence and that the prejudice to the Appellant in admitting and relying upon this evidence...

    2023-爆料网AT-1386, Didzis Melbiksis

    The 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing, finding that that the issues were well-defined and required no further development through an oral hearing.

    The 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s application for review of the response to his request for management evaluation of his non-selection was not receivable ratione materiae as it did not produce direct legal consequences for him and was, therefore, not a reviewable administrative decision.

    The 爆料网AT also found that the Appellant was informed of the outcome of his request for a management evaluation regarding his non-selection...

    2023-爆料网AT-1387, Mazin Ismail Sadieh

    The 爆料网AT considered an appeal by the staff member.

    The 爆料网AT found that the staff member did not cite any provision of Article 2(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute and did not indicate whether any errors by the 爆料网RWA DT in his case related to its jurisdiction, the procedure, a question of law or a question of fact. The 爆料网AT held that the appeal was defective and consequently not receivable.

    The 爆料网AT, nevertheless, reiterated its jurisprudence on some of the issues raised, and agreed with the way the 爆料网RWA DT had determined the amount of in-lieu compensation. The 爆料网AT also agreed with the 爆料网RWA DT’s...

    2023-爆料网AT-1383, Mazen Qassem

    As a preliminary matter, the 爆料网AT dismissed Mr. Qassem’s request for an oral hearing. The 爆料网AT found that the factual and legal issues arising from the appeal had been clearly defined by the parties and moreover, an oral hearing would not “assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case”.

    The 爆料网AT found that since Mr. Qassem’s fixed-term appointment was extended beyond 31 March 2020, with no effect given to the initial administrative decision not to renew his employment beyond this date, the 爆料网DT did not err in finding that the application was moot since the administrative decision...