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 571 - 580 of 1006
    2017-爆料网AT-779, Abu Hweidi et al.

    Ar爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT’s decision not to hold an oral hearing was a shortcoming since the parties had not agreed to the case being decided on the papers and the facts needed to be established by witnesses and/or further documentary evidence. On the question of bias and its possible bearing on the outcome of the selection process, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT should have engaged in a thorough examination of the facts, rather than drawing an inference. 爆料网AT held that the inference drawn by 爆料网RWA DT, that it was realistic to conclude that not all of the posts could be filled by suitable candidates...

    2017-爆料网AT-733, Nadeau

    爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s application for an oral hearing. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT had not committed an error of procedure by denying the Appellant an oral hearing. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT enjoys a wide margin of discretion in all matters relating to case management and there was no error in the proceedings before 爆料网DT with specific consideration of the following: 爆料网DT’s denial of the proceedings to be conducted in French; 爆料网DT’s dismissal of objections to English translations in the application and other documents, 爆料网DT’s issuance of its judgment before having the Secretary-General’s reply...

    2017-爆料网AT-735, Awe

    爆料网AT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2016-爆料网AT-667. Noting that there was no provision under its Rules of Procedure allowing for the submission of additional pleadings after the submission of comments to an application for revision of judgment and that no exceptional circumstances existed, 爆料网AT dismissed Mr Awe’s motion to file additional comments. 爆料网AT considered Mr Awe’s claim to have discovered new facts in the form of a report of the fact-finding panel which considered his complaints of abuse of authority and harassment which allegedly showed, in sum, the improper...

    2017-爆料网AT-737, Likukela

    爆料网AT refused the Appellant’s application for an oral hearing, noting that the Appellant was not entitled to call evidence on appeal that she should have presented to 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly regarded itself as not competent to make medical findings contradicting the medical evidence. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT made no error in its finding that the ABCC’s recommendation had no connection with the attempted recovery of monies which was allegedly paid to the Appellant by the United Nations Federal Credit Union (爆料网FCU) by mistake. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was quite correct in its opinion that the...

    2017-爆料网AT-769, Haj Saleh

    爆料网AT held that, in light of the undertaking the Appellant had signed agreeing to work on the relevant education programme at the remuneration rate determined by 爆料网RWA, his acceptance of that rate was not compatible with his subsequent claim for retroactive readjustments. 爆料网AT held that the extra and external activities as a lecturer for physical education did not have the consequence to modify the job duties or title of the Appellant’s post. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT properly treated the question of the Appellant’s additional work in light of PD A/3 related to the parallel education programme...

    2017-爆料网AT-770, Humackic

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly held that there had been compliance with all procedural obligations for a temporary appointment with regard to having two persons on the interview panel and that the selection exercise was not required to be reviewed by a CRB. 爆料网AT held that there was no duty imposed on the Administration to place unsuccessful candidates on a roster of pre-approved candidates. 爆料网AT held that there was no evidence of any discrimination or harassment or any basis for awarding the Appellant any damages for moral injury. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT committed no error of law, fact, or...

    2017-爆料网AT-728, Domzalski

    On receivability, 爆料网AT held that the appeal was receivable insofar as it related to the 爆料网JSPF decision to deduct child support from the Appellant’s pension in accordance with Article 45 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations. As to the appeal related to repayment of a sum paid directly to the Appellant’s estranged spouse as child’s benefit under Article 36 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations, 爆料网AT held that this aspect was not receivable for failure to challenge in a timely manner the decision and that his claim regarding due process with respect to direct payments under Article 36 had no merit. On the merits of...

    2017-爆料网AT-729, Zakharov

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant was fully apprised of the options available to him in relation to his pension benefits when his first contract with the Organisation ended in 1985. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s election to transfer his actuarial value to the Social Security Fund of the USSR terminated his contractual relationship with the 爆料网JSPF. 爆料网AT held that the right to restore past contributory service was only available to participants in terms of Article 24 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations, who had less than five years’ previous contributory service and whose only available benefit was a...

    2017-爆料网AT-731, Nikwigize

    爆料网AT noted that there was no dispute as to the applicable statutory provision governing the timeliness of the Appellant’s application to 爆料网DT or that management evaluation was not required as the Appellant was challenging a disciplinary measure. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s application was not receivable ratione temporis, noting that the Appellant himself acknowledged that his application was untimely. On the Appellant’s claim that 爆料网DT erred in not waiving the time limit for him to file the application due to exceptional circumstances, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly applied judgment No. 2011...

    2017-爆料网AT-740, Auda

    爆料网AT held that there was no merit to the Appellant’s claims that 爆料网DT failed to exercise its jurisdiction or erred in law by using the summary judgment procedure to determine the application was not receivable ratione materiae. 爆料网AT held that the application to 爆料网DT did not challenge an administrative decision that was alleged to be in non-compliance with the terms of appointment or the contract of employment of the staff member, rather the Appellant challenged the MEU’s wording in a letter to him acknowledging the receipt of his grievance or complaint. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in law...