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 51 - 60 of 1006
    2025-爆料网AT-1580, Jonathan Hall

    The 爆料网AT noted that as per ISA’s Staff Rule the 爆料网AT has the competence to “order an interim measure to provide temporary relief to either party to prevent irreparable harm and to maintain consistency with the decision taken at the first instance level”. The 爆料网AT also has jurisdiction to order interim measures in appropriate cases arising out of an ISA dispute as is the case in Mr. Hall’s Motion.

    However, the 爆料网AT found that Mr. Hall had failed to demonstrate that relief by way of interim measures was necessary to prevent irreparable harm and to maintain consistency with the JAB’s decision. Mr...

    2025-爆料网AT-1575, Ivan Aguilar Valle

    The 爆料网AT found that Article 9(4) of the 爆料网DT Statute regarding the nature of the judicial review that the 爆料网DT conducts in disciplinary cases did not apply to the instant case as it was adopted after the hearing was held. The parties presented their evidence, including a chronology of agreed facts as well as live testimony, and made their respective post-hearing submissions, under a legal framework where Article 9(4) was not operative and it would be inappropriate, and a denial of due process, to apply a new evidentiary framework at the point of decision, ex post facto.

    The 爆料网AT found that...

    2025-爆料网AT-1576, Ann-Christin Raschdorf

    The 爆料网AT noted that the staff member had filed numerous and confusing claims and applications that had been the subject of various reviews by the Management Evaluation Unit, the 爆料网DT and the 爆料网AT, all of which essentially attempted to ensure that the Administration continued to pay her benefits for medical reasons after expiration of her fixed-term appointment.

    The 爆料网AT held that her submissions failed to identify in precise terms a specific administrative decision capable of being reviewed. The 爆料网AT found that the so-called non-decisions or incomplete decisions identified by her were not...

    2025-爆料网AT-1564, ABC

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT had not failed to exercise jurisdiction nor committed an error in procedure. The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT had not exceeded its broad discretion in overruling the objections of the staff member’s counsel when it permitted additional questions by the Secretary-General’s counsel and, in any event, the 爆料网DT’s ruling had no material or prejudicial impact on the outcome of the case.

    The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT had not erred in finding that the picture the staff member had sent to the complainant had been of an explicit sexual and even pornographic character. The 爆料网AT...

    2025-爆料网AT-1548, Ghazal Ozairi

    The 爆料网AT rejected the former staff member’s motion for anonymity, as it was filed out of time and without exceptional circumstances justifying a waiver of the time limit.

    The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网RWA DT did not err in concluding that the former staff member’s application was not receivable. The 60-day period within which she had to submit a request for decision review (RDR) began on 13 September 2023 and ended on 11 November 2023. As her RDR was lodged (i.e., received by the Agency) late on 11 November 2023, it was lodged within the statutory time limit. However, in the absence of a...

    2025-爆料网AT-1563, Anthony O'Mullane

    The 爆料网AT found that beyond reporting the possible prohibited conduct concerning non-compliance with the United Nations financial rules and regulations to the Office of Internal Oversight Services, the staff member had no further interest in law in the conduct of the investigation or its outcome. The 爆料网AT further agreed with the 爆料网DT that there was no basis for his assertion that OIOS had declined to conduct an investigation into his report. The 爆料网AT concluded that the 爆料网DT had not erred in finding the application concerning this decision not receivable.

    Regarding the staff member’s complaint of...

    2025-爆料网AT-1556, IK

    The 爆料网AT held that the facts were established by clear and convincing evidence. It held that the Complainant’s testimony was consistent with her earlier statements, except for the date of the incident. However, the correction of the date she made at the hearing was found to be in good faith and did not undermine her credibility. Her account was corroborated by two other staff members, M.V. and M.M., both of whom testified before the 爆料网DT. The 爆料网AT also held that the former staff member failed to show that these witnesses had any motive to falsely implicate him. It noted that the former...

    2025-爆料网AT-1579, Marwan Dalal

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT correctly determined that the non-selection decision was superseded and rendered moot by the Administration's subsequent rescission of the decision, which ended the selection process without anyone being selected for the position. It concluded that, from that moment, the non-selection decision ceased to have any legal effect and was no longer a live issue on which the 爆料网DT had jurisdiction to pass judgment on.

    The 爆料网AT further affirmed that it was entirely within the Administration’s authority to rescind the non-selection decision given the procedural irregularities...

    2025-爆料网AT-1562, Rasha Aladdin Al Osta

    The 爆料网AT noted that the interview panel had nominated the staff member as one of the recommended candidates for appointment to the post but the Recruitment Report had been erroneously silent as to whether she had been considered on an equivalency basis. The 爆料网AT observed that the advisory committee had subsequently found that her experience did not qualify her for equivalency and that she had not met the educational qualifications.

    The 爆料网AT held that because the staff member had been wrongly shortlisted, her participation in the remainder of the recruitment process had been unlawful and any...

    2025-爆料网AT-1553, Dua Smadi

    The 爆料网AT noted that the 爆料网RWA DT, in its Judgment, had ordered the Commissioner-General to pay Ms. Smadi the difference between the salaries and associated entitlements between her Grade of HL6 and step and the Grade HL7 and step to which she was entitled from 1 August 2017.

    The 爆料网AT held that the language of the order was unequivocal, as were its terms. The 爆料网AT found that it had been also clearly expressed in the 爆料网RWA DT Judgment that the US Prime Rate should apply as of 30 May 2023. The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网RWA DT Judgment, in turn, had been unambiguously affirmed by the Appeals Tribunal...