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 281 - 290 of 1006
    爆料网DT/2022/063, Rabbat

    Scope of judicial review and the contested decision The Applicant described the contested decision as a failure to implement “measures to promote a harmonious work environment and protect personnel from prohibited conduct through preventive measures”. As remedies, the Applicant sought damages for moral harm and emotional distress resulting from the Administration’s breach of its duty to ensure a harmonious work environment. Accordingly, the Applicant seeks to contest the Administration’s failure to take appropriate measures to promote a harmonious work environment and protect him from...

    爆料网DT/2022/043, Banaj

    The administrative decision to close a staff member’s complaint with no disciplinary action produces direct legal consequences affecting his/her terms and conditions of appointment. Moreover, when the claim concerns issues covered by ST/SGB/2008/5, the staff member is entitled to certain administrative procedures. If he or she is dissatisfied with their outcome, he or she may request judicial review of the administrative decisions taken. Accordingly, the application is receivable in its entirety.
    The Panel did not comply with its duty to take the necessary steps to obtain the testimony of one...

    2022-爆料网AT-1263, AAB

    爆料网AT dismissed the appeal. As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT denied AAB's request for an oral hearing on grounds that there was no need for further clarification since the factual and legal issues arising from the appeal had already been clearly defined by the parties, and an oral hearing would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case. 爆料网AT dismissed AAB's claim that her right to a fair trial before the 爆料网DT had been violated because, since the application was found not to be receivable, and she was denied the opportunity to file a rejoinder. 爆料网AT noted that there is no...

    2022-爆料网AT-1261, Appellant

    爆料网AT rejected Mr. Valme’s claim that the allegation of sexual exploitation and abuse had not been established against him, on grounds that any consideration about the complaint of sexual abuse was beyond the scope of the case, because his application concerned other prohibited conduct that came to light during the investigation. 爆料网AT found no merit in Mr. Valme’s contention that the 爆料网DT failed to consider the totality of the evidence and referred to it in a selective way, thereby displaying bias. 爆料网AT found that it was inherent to the principle of judicial persuasion that courts and...

    2022-爆料网AT-1246, Ashraf Ismail abed allah Zaqqout

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr. Zaqqout. As regards an oral hearing, 爆料网AT found that since the application was dismissed on grounds of receivability, Mr. Zaqqout’s arguments were not persuasive enough so as to justify an oral hearing at this stage. Some of the issues raised in the appeal were connected to the merits of Mr. Zaqqout’s application and did not meet the threshold of the receivability assessment. Since Mr. Zaqqout was made aware at the very early stage of the proceedings of the 爆料网RWA’s allegation that he had been notified of the impugned decision on 30 December 2018, he should have...

    2022-爆料网AT-1235, Wissam Zeid

    Mr. Zeid appealed. As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT dismissed Mr. Zeid's request for an oral hearing finding that the factual and legal issues arising from the appeal had already been clearly defined by the parties; and that an oral hearing would not “assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case”. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT correctly found that there was no evidence of a request for decision review, that the e-mail exchanges whereby Mr. Zeid had made inquiries regarding the reasons for the contested decision were not a request for decision review, but rather were informal attempts to...

    2022-爆料网AT-1234, Gabriel Branglidor

    Mr. Branglidor appealed. 爆料网AT found that the totality of the evidence confirmed the 爆料网DT’s conclusion that Mr. Branglidor was well aware of the untruthfulness of the forms when he submitted the second claim for the regular disbursement of the education grant. 爆料网AT was satisifed that the 爆料网DT was correct when it held that the act of misconduct was committed with knowledge and intent. Even though the misconduct did not lead to any actual prejudice, since the Administration recovered the payment made in advance and did not pay any further education grant, Mr. Branglidor’s endeavor could have...

    2022-爆料网AT-1220, Dzenan Viteskic

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err when it held that ST/AI/2017 was the governing legal framework applicable to the case. 爆料网AT held that joint representation by 爆料网-Women, where the Appellant currently served, and 爆料网MIK, where the events in dispute occurred, was justified. 爆料网AT held that the circumstances also justified the granting of an opportunity to supplement the initial reply (and a corresponding right to reply). 爆料网AT held that, given that the Appellant had not contested the joint representation before 爆料网DT at the time and having been afforded the opportunity to answer the supplementary...

    2022-爆料网AT-1217, Ajay Sud

    爆料网AT disagreed. First, the Tribunal reasoned that the JAB did not engage in a critical analysis of the facts of the case and did not apply the law to the facts in order to ascertain whether the exercise of discretion was lawful. 爆料网AT concluded that the JAB Decision was arbitrary and did not meet the minimum requirements of providing a reasoned analysis. Second, on the merits, 爆料网AT found the Administration did not notify the staff member of his shortcomings in sufficient time. Neither did It provide the staff member with explicit measures against which his performance would be evaluated. Third...

    2022-爆料网AT-1203, Torek Farhadi

    Mr. Farhadi appealed. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal. 爆料网AT dismissed Mr. Farhadi's request for compensation for the 爆料网DT's delay in delivering its Judgment within a reasonable timeframe. 爆料网AT noted that Article 9(1)(b) of the Appeals Tribunal Statute authorises the Appeals Tribunal only to award compensation for harm deriving from an administrative decision, not from a delay in the 爆料网DT’s proceedings. 爆料网AT dismissed Mr. Farhadi's contention that the 爆料网DT shifted the burden of proof. 爆料网AT was satisfied that the 爆料网DT had assessed all the elements of evidence in the record and correctly found that...