爆料网

爆料网DT Statute

  • Article 1
  • Article 10
  • Article 10.2
  • Article 10.3
  • Article 10.4
  • Article 10.5
  • Article 10.5(a)
  • Article 10.5(b)
  • Article 10.6
  • Article 10.7
  • Article 10.8
  • Article 10.9
  • Article 105
  • Article 11
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 11.2
  • Article 11.2(c)
  • Article 11.3
  • Article 11.4
  • Article 11.5
  • Article 11.6
  • Article 12
  • Article 12.1
  • Article 12.2
  • Article 12.3
  • Article 12.4
  • Article 12.5
  • Article 15.7
  • Article 18.2
  • Article 18.3
  • Article 19
  • Article 2
  • Article 2.1
  • Article 2.1(a)
  • Article 2.1(b)
  • Article 2.1(c)
  • Article 2.1(d)
  • Article 2.1(e)
  • Article 2.2
  • Article 2.3
  • Article 2.4
  • Article 2.5
  • Article 2.6
  • Article 2.7
  • Article 2.7(b)
  • Article 2.8
  • Article 2(a)
  • Article 2(b)
  • Article 3
  • Article 3.1
  • Article 3.1(a)
  • Article 3.1(b)
  • Article 3.1(c)
  • Article 32
  • Article 4.2
  • Article 4.5
  • Article 4.9
  • Article 6
  • Article 7
  • Article 7.1
  • Article 7.2
  • Article 7.2(e)
  • Article 7.2(h)
  • Article 7.2(i)
  • Article 7.5
  • Article 7(b)
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.1
  • Article 8.1(a)
  • Article 8.1(a)
  • Article 8.1(b)
  • Article 8.1(b)(ii)
  • Article 8.1(c)
  • Article 8.1(d)
  • Article 8.1(d)(i)
  • Article 8.1(d)(i)–(iv)
  • Article 8.1(d)(i)(a)
  • Article 8.1(d)(i)(b)
  • Article 8.1(d)(ii)
  • Article 8.1(d)(iii)
  • Article 8.1(d)(iv)
  • Article 8.1(i)
  • Article 8.1(i)(b)
  • Article 8.1(ii)
  • Article 8.1(ii)(c)
  • Article 8.2
  • Article 8.2(b)
  • Article 8.2(d)(i)
  • Article 8.3
  • Article 8.3(a)
  • Article 8.4
  • Article 8.5
  • Article 8.6
  • Article 8(a)
  • Article 8(c)
  • Article 8(d)(i)
  • Article 8(d)(ii)
  • Article 9
  • Article 9.1
  • Article 9.1
  • Article 9.1(b)
  • Article 9.2
  • Article 9.3
  • Article 9.4
  • Article 9.4
  • Article 9.4
    • Showing 181 - 190 of 1867
    爆料网DT/2023/122, Reilly

    It is common cause that the recommendations, acts, or determinations of the 爆料网EO are without direct legal consequences and do not constitute administrative decisions. The Administration’s rejection of the March 2020 Alternate Chair’s report did not represent a request to the Ethics Office for its review, i.e., “a review of the review”. Available documentary evidence is that, within the applicable legal framework, exchanges took place between the Administration, the Ethics Office and OIOS concerning the acceptance or non-acceptance of the March 2020 Alternate Chair’s report and recommendations...

    爆料网DT/2023/143, Tsiamitros

    Receivability
    The Tribunal reviewed the Applicant’s request for management evaluation and found that only the decision not to consider him eligible for a temporary appointment through the Talent Pool, at the P-2 level, was receivable and subject to judicial review. Any other decision to which the Applicant referred in his submissions was consequently not receivable.

    Merits
    The Tribunal referred to the applicable legal framework as well as to the evidence on record and noted that the practice is to only consider experience at the G-6 level and above (or equivalent experience outside of the 爆料网...

    2023-爆料网AT-1407, Lars Ronved

    Mr. Ronved appealed.

    The 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT Judgment.

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in finding the application not receivable with respect to the refusal of a temporary promotion to the P-4 level.? The contested decision before the 爆料网DT was the decision to extend the SPA, which the Appellant timely challenged before the MEU and the 爆料网DT.? The extension of the SPA and the denial to grant a promotion were two sides of the same decision, with the same time limits for management evaluation.? Therefore, the request for management evaluation of both decisions was...

    2023-爆料网AT-1406, Kamal Karki

    The 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for anonymity as the issue presented in his appeal was purely procedural and jurisdictional and did not involve any personal data which had to be protected.

    The 爆料网AT also denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing, finding that that it would not assist the Appeals Tribunal in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case.

    The 爆料网AT held that because the Appellant filed his application 93 days after the receipt of the contested administrative decision, it was not receivable, absent waiver of the deadline of the 爆料网DT. The 爆料网AT observed that given...

    爆料网DT/2023/136, Koura

    The Applicant failed to convince the Tribunal that the Administration raised in him a legitimate expectation of renewal of his FTA. An erroneously raised personnel action without a written contract does not constitute a ground for legitimate expectation of renewal.

    The Tribunal agreed with the Applicant that the Staff Regulations and Rules must be applied uniformly and consistently to staff members. United Nations procedures exist to facilitate fair and transparent substantive decisions, and the failure to abide by required procedures is no mere “technicality”, but instead undermines...

    爆料网DT/2023/133, Ocokoru

    This application does not meet the requirements of art. 12(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute and art. 30 of the 爆料网DT Rules of Procedure. There is no need to clarify the meaning of Judgment Ocokoru 爆料网DT/2015/004 since it was fully implemented years ago. Furthermore, the grounds submitted by the Applicant as a basis for interpretation have already been clearly and unambiguously determined by this Tribunal previously. Consequently, the Tribunal dismisses the application in its entirety.

    爆料网DT/2023/132, Naji

    The Tribunal finds that the Applicant is challenging an administrative decision that is alleged to be in non-compliance with his terms of appointment or his contract of employment and is not challenging the legitimacy of General Assembly resolution 66/234. The application is accordingly receivable.

    The General Assembly resolution, Staff Rules, and the ICSC principles and guidelines are clear and unambiguous. These rules stipulate that GS staff wishing to apply for a professional post must first pass the G to P exam unless exceptional approval for a waiver is granted.

    Staff at level FS-5 and...

    爆料网DT/2023/131, Sahyoun

    The application was filed without being preceded by a timely filing of a request for management evaluation and the subject matter complained of does not include an administrative decision. The Applicant did not seek management evaluation of the final non-selection decision, which was required to contest it. She only requested management evaluation of the decision not to invite her to a competency-based interview.

    The Applicant seeks to contest a preliminary step in a selection process, which can only be challenged in the context of a final selection decision. It is a premature contestation of...

    爆料网DT/2023/137, Naeem

    The Tribunal recalled that receivability is a condition sine qua non for judicial review.

    The Tribunal noted that by the time the Applicant filed his application, he had not been formally notified of the abolition of his post and the restructuring exercise was still ongoing. Up to the date of the judgment’s issuance, the situation remained the same as showed by a November 2023 email from 爆料网DP to the Applicant asking him to confirm his interest in the position of Programme Assistant at the G-5 level. So far, the Applicant is still serving at the G-6 level in 爆料网DP Pakistan.

    The Tribunal...