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 461 - 470 of 1867
    2014-爆料网AT-487, Ruyooka

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not succeed in establishing any error of fact or law which would warrant the reversal of the 爆料网DT judgment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly concluded that the termination of the Appellant’s appointment was firmly supported by the evidence relative to the necessities of service in the context of a downsizing exercise, and no bias or improper purpose vitiated the impugned decision. 爆料网AT held that as the Appellant did not effectively rebut the conclusions of the impugned judgment, he did not satisfy the burden of demonstrating that it was defective such as to...

    2014-爆料网AT-484, Abassa

    爆料网AT considered an appeal of judgment No. 爆料网DT/2013/145. On the issue of whether 爆料网DT erred in law in not receiving the Appellant’s application for revision of judgment, 爆料网AT held that it did. 爆料网AT noted that to import into Article 12(1) of the 爆料网DT Statute the limitations presently advocated by 爆料网DT, merely because of the inclusion of the word “executable,” would be unduly restrictive and tantamount to a denial of an already narrowly construed remedy and unduly circumscribe the right of access of staff members to 爆料网DT. With respect to the merits of the application for revision, 爆料网AT held that...

    2014-爆料网AT-481, Lee

    爆料网AT considered appeals of Order Nos. 182 (GVA/2013), 183 (GVA/2013), and 199 (GVA/2013), and Summary judgment No. 爆料网DT/2013/147. As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s requests for oral proceedings, confidentiality, to file additional proceedings, to file additional documentary evidence, and to order production of documents. With respect to Orders Nos. 182, 183 and 199, 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT did not exceed its competence or jurisdiction in issuing these orders and in denying the Appellant’s applications to suspend action. 爆料网AT held that the appeals of these Orders were not...

    2014-爆料网AT-475, Gehr

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. The Secretary-General contended that the Ethics Office’s determination that no credible prima facie case of retaliation had been established was not an administrative decision subject to judicial review under Article 2 of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT noted that the key characteristic of an administrative decision subject to judicial review is that the decision must produce direct legal consequences affecting a staff member’s terms or conditions of appointment. 爆料网AT found that, in this case, the recommendation of the Ethics Office had no legal...

    2014-爆料网AT-474, Al-Mulla

    As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s motion “for a finding of the Respondent’s dissembling. ” With respect to the substance of the appeal, 爆料网AT held that, regardless of the nature of the new fact discovered by an applicant, timeliness of the filing of an application for revision is essential. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

    2014-爆料网AT-472, Nianda-Lusakueno

    爆料网AT recalled that it has consistently held that Article 8(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute must be read literally to prohibit 爆料网DT from waiving the deadlines for seeking management evaluation and that 爆料网DT has no jurisdiction or competence to waive such deadlines. 爆料网AT held that ignorance of the law is no excuse and, while it was unfort爆料网ATe that Mr. Nianda-Lusakueno relied on the informal review procedure, such reliance did not qualify as exceptional circumstances under ICAO Staff Rule 111. 1, paragraph 8. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Secretary-General of ICAO.

    2014-爆料网AT-478, Bofill

    爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s submission that she let the deadline elapse primarily because she was confused by the first sentence of the message she received from the Office of the Deputy High Commissioner. 爆料网AT noted that this circumstance was previously considered by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT was satisfied that the 爆料网DT’s pronouncement was in accordance with the established case law. 爆料网AT rejected the appeal.

    2014-爆料网AT-476, Machanguana

    爆料网AT considered an appeal limited to the Appellant’s claim that 爆料网DT erred in awarding costs against him. 爆料网AT noted that the jurisdiction of a tribunal to award costs is narrowly restricted to instances where a party has manifestly abused the proceedings. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT gave no reasons for its determination that the Appellant had manifestly abused the proceedings, cited no evidence establishing that his application was frivolous or vexatious, or that he had deliberately delayed the proceedings, or had disobeyed an order of 爆料网DT or had, in any other way, abused 爆料网DT’s proceedings. 爆料网AT...

    2014-爆料网AT-470, Kissila

    The Appellant claimed that her interpretation of the advice given by the 爆料网DT Registry was that an extension of time was not needed. 爆料网AT noted that it has repeatedly and consistently strictly enforced the time limits for filing applications and appeals, which assures the goal of hearing cases and rendering judgments in a timely fashion. 爆料网AT found that it was unreasonable for the Appellant, even as a layperson, to conclude that an extension of time would never be needed and that there was no limitation on the time for filing. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not demonstrate any error of law...

    2014-爆料网AT-469, Eissa

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General which challenged the remedies afforded Mr Eissa. 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the Secretary-General’s contention that 爆料网DT erred in not explaining which irregularities were substantive and which were procedural, as either type of irregularity may support an award of moral damages. 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the Secretary-General’s contention that the award was duplicative of the award of alternative compensation in lieu of rescission. 爆料网AT noted that an award under Article 10(5)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute is alternative...