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 31 - 40 of 1867
    2025-爆料网AT-1588, Dorah Likukela

    The 爆料网AT determined that it had been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the former staff member committed serious misconduct by: i) failing to return to the United Nations Federal Credit Union (爆料网FCU) funds of USD 587,428.65 that were erroneously credited to her account and to which she was not entitled; ii) failing to comply with a judgment issued by the High Court of Zambia (High Court Judgment), which ordered her to return the aforementioned funds to 爆料网FCU; and iii) submitting false documentation and/or misrepresenting facts during the investigation conducted by the Office...

    2025-爆料网AT-1589, Ufuoma Choice Okoro

    The 爆料网AT held that the former staff member’s challenge to the ALWP decision and the New York position decision was not receivable, as she had not sought management evaluation of those decisions.

    Regarding the disciplinary measure, the 爆料网AT determined that her statements and social media posts constituted unauthorized outside activities amounting to misconduct. It noted that she issued statements, posted articles, and gave interviews without prior authorization, despite repeated warnings. It held that her social media engagements referenced international humanitarian assistance, humanitarian...

    2025-爆料网AT-1572, Nader Slayyeh

    The 爆料网AT found that Mr. Slayyeh did not file a proper appeal of the impugned Judgment but rather was bringing a new claim for compensation that had not been submitted to the Dispute Tribunal. The 爆料网AT held that he could not introduce on appeal an issue not previously presented to the first instance tribunal as it is a violation of the due process rights of the other party and does not comply with the two-tier system of administration of justice.

    The 爆料网AT found that the remedies available under Article 10(5) of the 爆料网RWA DT Statute allow the 爆料网RWA DT to rescind the contested decision or order...

    2025-爆料网AT-1570, KHALED HEJAB

    The 爆料网AT held that none of the reasons provided by Mr. Hejab, considered individually or collectively, were convincing enough to consider his case exceptional, so as to warrant the award of higher compensation than set by Article 10(5) of the 爆料网RWA DT Statute.

    The 爆料网AT held that it is not unusual for an older staff member, particularly one who is close to retirement, to have difficulty in finding another job. Likewise, although there are difficult economic conditions where he lives, this is also not the type of factor that warrants compensation in excess of the statutory norm.

    The 爆料网AT held...

    2025-爆料网AT-1583, Martin Akerman

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT did not err in concluding that the former staff member’s application was not receivable ratione materiae because he did not attempt to resolve the dispute through the office of the United Nations Funds and Programmes Ombudsman, as explicitly required by the Settlement Agreement to which he had expressly agreed. The 爆料网AT found that the terms of the Settlement Agreement remained binding and enforceable on the parties, and that the 爆料网DT committed no error in holding the parties to its terms.

    The 爆料网AT further found that the 爆料网DT did not err in determining that the...

    2025-爆料网AT-1568, Giuseppe Fusco

    The 爆料网AT found that 爆料网ICEF had conducted the selection process in a manner fully consistent with its administrative legal framework, including having provided detailed reasons for considering the staff member unsuitable for the post. The 爆料网AT held that his candidature had received full and fair consideration, and he had not shown through clear and convincing evidence that he had been denied a fair chance of selection. The 爆料网AT noted that there was no evidence of bias or ill-motive against him.

    The 爆料网AT was of the view that 爆料网ICEF’s failure to notify the staff member of the non-selection...

    2025-爆料网AT-1578, Zekriat Swaidan

    The 爆料网AT noted that the staff member had applied for vacancies of different posts, at different times, with different selection processes, and had not been selected for different reasons. The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT had correctly decided that each of these decisions was separate and there was no evidence that they were related. The 爆料网AT held that she had not met her burden of showing that the impugned Judgment was defective.

    The 爆料网AT held that the application in respect of the post in Pretoria was clearly out of time and in respect of the post in Nairobi premature and, as such, not receivable...

    2025-爆料网AT-1569, Nicole Wynn

    The 爆料网AT was of the view that the 爆料网DT’s analysis of the applicable legal framework governing the education grant, specifically the costs admissible for reimbursement, had been erroneous and the 爆料网DT had exceeded its jurisdiction when it found the promulgation of the amended administrative instruction unlawful. The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT had failed to provide the reasons, facts and law on which it had based its Judgment.

    The 爆料网AT held that the fees which were clearly intended to cover extra-curricular activities or general non-academic services, and were not intended to cover administrative...

    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-1581, Waleed Ammar

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in finding that the Administration had not proven by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Ammar made the Facebook post because the Inspector General’s Office (IGO) inappropriately discounted the possibility that Mr. Ammar’s Facebook account had been hacked. The 爆料网AT found that the Administration met its burden of establishing that it was highly probable that Mr. Ammar posted the Comment and thus publicly expressed support for an honour killing. The Administration produced uncontradicted evidence that the comment came from Mr. Ammar’s Facebook account and he...