爆料网

爆料网DT RoP

  • Article 10
  • Article 10.1
  • Article 10.5(b)
  • Article 11
  • Article 11.2
  • Article 11.2(a)
  • Article 11.2(c)
  • Article 12
  • Article 12.1
  • Article 13
  • Article 13.1
  • Article 13.2
  • Article 13.3
  • Article 13.4
  • Article 14
  • Article 14.1
  • Article 14.4
  • Article 15
  • Article 15.1
  • Article 15.13
  • Article 15.2
  • Article 15.3
  • Article 15.4
  • Article 15.5
  • Article 15.6
  • Article 15.7
  • Article 16
  • Article 16.1
  • Article 16.2
  • Article 16.3
  • Article 16.6
  • Article 17
  • Article 17.1
  • Article 17.2
  • Article 17.3
  • Article 17.5
  • Article 17.6
  • Article 17.6
  • Article 18
  • Article 18.1
  • Article 18.2
  • Article 18.3
  • Article 18.4
  • Article 18.5
  • Article 19
  • Article 19.1
  • Article 2
  • Article 2.1(a)
  • Article 20
  • Article 21
  • Article 22
  • Article 24
  • Article 24.1
  • Article 24.2
  • Article 24.3
  • Article 25
  • Article 26
  • Article 26.2
  • Article 27
  • Article 27.1
  • Article 27.2
  • Article 27.2(c)
  • Article 28
  • Article 28.2
  • Article 29
  • Article 29.1
  • Article 29.2
  • Article 30
  • Article 31
  • Article 31.1
  • Article 32
  • Article 32.2
  • Article 34
  • Article 34(a)
  • Article 34(b)
  • Article 35
  • Article 36
  • Article 36.1
  • Article 4.7
  • Article 5.2
  • Article 6.2
  • Article 7
  • Article 7.1
  • Article 7.1(a)
  • Article 7.1(b)
  • Article 7.1(c)
  • Article 7.2
  • Article 7.3
  • Article 7.4
  • Article 7.5
  • Article 7.6
  • Article 7(a)
  • Article 7(b)
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.1
  • Article 8.2
  • Article 8.2(c)
  • Article 8.2(e)
  • Article 8.2(g)
  • Article 8.3
  • Article 8.4
  • Article 8.6
  • Article 8(d)(i)
  • Article 9
    • Showing 81 - 90 of 671
    2023-爆料网AT-1389, Maryam H. Wathanafa

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

    The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT had not erred in fact when it had not considered separation on retirement, mentioned in the separation notice, to be the reason for the contested decision; the mention of retirement had no import on the staff member’s separation. The 爆料网AT was of the view that the letter informing her of the expiry of her fixed-term appointment was in line with the abolition of the post she encumbered.

    The 爆料网AT noted that judicial review in the context of suspension of action is different from the review conducted by the Tribunal...

    2023-爆料网AT-1379, Leopold Camille Yodjeu Ntemde

    The 爆料网AT considered three appeals by the applicant.

    The 爆料网AT found that the impugned Order was an interlocutory order and was obviously beyond the competence of the 爆料网AT.

    The 爆料网AT held that the applicant had not submitted documents to prove being a United Nations staff member and that he had no legal standing before the 爆料网DT. The 爆料网AT noted that there was no evidence of an offer of appointment having been issued to him for either post. Second, he failed to complete the pre-recruitment formalities for both posts. Third, he failed to confirm, within a reasonable time, his interest and...

    2023-爆料网AT-1376, Samuel Bwalya

    Mr. Bwalya appealed.

    The 爆料网AT found that Mr. Bwalya had not demonstrated that the 爆料网DT erred in finding that it had been established by clear and convincing evidence that he had committed misconduct by instructing a 爆料网DP staff member to forge a backdated Memorandum of Understanding between the Ethiopian Ministry of Agriculture and the private firm Digata and to make a misrepresentation in a second document, intentionally acting to avoid or deviate from 爆料网DP’s Financial Regulations, Rules and Procedures through the creation of these documents, and demonstrating favouritism in the award of a...

    爆料网DT/2023/107, Applicant

    The issue in this case is whether EG and SEG consist of two independent benefits that can be granted in combination.

    Pursuant to sec. 6.1(a) of ST/AI/2018/2/Amend.1, the overall maximum amount of SEG shall be equal to the upper limit of the top bracket of the global sliding scale applicable to the education grant scheme. The law does not allow an interpretation where EG and SEG can be “stacked”.

    Indeed, the difference between EG and SEG is in the percentages of reimbursement that eligible staff members are entitled to receive. This difference in reimbursement percentage addresses the...

    爆料网DT/2023/070, Applicant

    Receivability

    The Respondent challenged the receivability of the application. He argued that the Dispute Tribunal may only issue an Order for execution under art. 12.4 of its Statute where a judgment required a time limit for execution and such execution had not been carried out.

    The Tribunal considered that while Judgment Applicant 爆料网DT/2022/055 did not provide for its execution within a certain period of time, it was reasonable to infer that in the absence of an appeal, said judgment should have been executed within a reasonable time, after the expiry of the 60-day time limit to file an...

    爆料网DT/2023/029, Fernando Salon

    The Applicant claims that several events of prohibited conduct occurred between 2018 and 2022 affecting him. However, he did not follow the procedural path under Bulletins ST/SGB/2008/5 (Prohibition of discrimination, harassment, including sexual harassment, and abuse of authority) and ST/SGB/2019/8 (Addressing discrimination, harassment, including sexual harassment, and abuse of authority) for the handling of formal reports of prohibited conduct and the Dispute Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to conduct an investigation into such allegations.

    There is no evidence that the Applicant ever...

    爆料网DT/2023/020, Applicant

    The Tribunal decided on its own initiative and in accordance with art. 9 of its Rules of Procedure, to adjudicate the present application by way of summary judgement.

    The Tribunal noted that in accordance with art. 8.4 of the Tribunal’s Statute and art. 7.6 of its Rules of Procedure, an application shall not be receivable if it is filed more than three years after the applicant’s receipt of the contested administrative decision. The Applicant filed her application on 5 March 2023 indicating that the contested decision was made in October 1995, that is, more than 27 years earlier. Consequently...

    爆料网DT/2022/089, Lanla Kamara-Joyner

    The written reprimand

    Factual basis for the imposition of the measure

    爆料网PAD, as an ad hoc special interest group, advocates for issues relating to conditions of work pertaining to staff members of African descent in the United Nations.

    爆料网OMS is established “to make available confidential services of impartial and independent persons to address work-related issues of staff members” (see ST/SGB/2016/7 para 1.1). 爆料网OMS is guided in its work by four core principles, namely independence, confidentiality, neutrality, and informality.

    It appeared from the information on record that the Applicant...

    2022-爆料网AT-1309, Emma Reilly

    爆料网AT endorsed the 爆料网DT’s holding that the decision to issue a press release in response to allegations that OHCHR had endangered the lives of Chinese human rights defenders who attended the Human Rights Council in Geneva in March 2013 fell within the discretion of the Organization and was a managerial prerogative. 爆料网AT found that the specific part of it which concerned the issue of the provision of names of Chinese human rights activists to the Chinese government fell outside the scope of its judicial review due to the general nature of its content and to the fact that it embodied a...

    2022-爆料网AT-1301, Koffi Gilles Wilfried Amani

    The 爆料网AT held that because the possible error in the assessment of the facts by the 爆料网DT had no bearing on the outcome of the case, the Secretary-General’s cross-appeal could not be received.

    The 爆料网AT found that although an Ivorian Court judgment, finding the staff member guilty of fraud, had not been cited in the sanction letter, this was inconsequential because it was clear from the record that he had been aware of the judgment when he applied for the position and completed the PHP specifying “no” to the question whether he had “ever been indicted, fined or imprisoned for the violation of...