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 691 - 700 of 1867
    2021-爆料网AT-1106, Giles III

    爆料网AT agreed that the Secretary-General has implied discretion to revoke benefits if a staff member does not satisfactorily furnish evidence of continued eligibility of existing entitlements, which may arise because of a change in circumstances. 爆料网AT also found that 爆料网DT did not err when it held that the legal frameworks for the two benefit systems are different and that the decisions made under the two legal regimes need not be consistent. Article 33 of the 爆料网SPF Regulations does not require proof of a loss of earning capacity and the requirement of “incapacitation” is a purely medical...

    2021-爆料网AT-1102, Archana Patkar

    爆料网AT found no fault with the 爆料网DT’s reasoning that the letter of 24 November 2017 was unambiguous and unconditional about the separation of Ms Patkar upon the expiration of her appointment and agreed that the letter conveyed the final decision of the Administration not to renew her appointment. 爆料网AT held that the letter produced a direct adverse consequence which was not contingent upon the possibility of Ms Patkar’s selection for any other position. Nor did the relevant provision in the letter that the non-renewal decision would cease to be applicable if Ms Patkar should be selected for...

    2021-爆料网AT-1101, Testargachew Zewdie Kebede

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in stating that it had no jurisdiction as Mr Kebede’s claim concerned the internal affairs of the staff union, and therefore, an area protected from employer interference. 爆料网AT held, however, that error was without consequence because Mr Kebede’s claim for compensation was otherwise time-barred per Staff Rule 3.17(ii). 爆料网DT also erred in finding that Mr Kebede’s application for a transfer was not receivable for lack of jurisdiction.

    2021-爆料网AT-1079, Reilly

    爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT finding that it lacked jurisdiction in respect of the staff member’s application to review the determination of the Second Alternate Chair. 爆料网AT noted that the subject matter jurisdiction of 爆料网DT is limited to the review of administrative decisions. The determinations of the Second Alternate Chair do not constitute administrative decisions, and as such, any application to review them before the 爆料网DT is not receivable. 爆料网AT highlighted that ST/SGB/2017/2/Rev.1 confers on the Ethics Office only the power to recommend, advise and refer, and Section 10.3 of ST/SGB/2017/2/...

    2021-爆料网AT-1093, Leonid Dolgopolov

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s finding that the challenge to the decision by the Secretary-General not to waive Mr Dolgopolov’s immunity was not receivable on the ground that it was an executive/political decision is incorrect. 爆料网AT held, however, that 爆料网DT was correct in finding Mr Dolgopolov’s applications not receivable, but for other reasons. 爆料网AT held that Mr Dolgopolov’s applications were not receivable, because he did not refer the impugned decision regarding his request to sue the Ukrainian Ambassador to management evaluation, and the decision in respect of G-4 visa restrictions imposed by the...

    2021-爆料网AT-1092, Olga Mokrova

    爆料网DT correctly found that Ms Mokrova’s application was not receivable ratione materiae because she filed a request for management evaluation beyond the 60 days of the notification of the contested decision by the Under-Secretary-General for DSS.

    2021-爆料网AT-1078, Abdalla Mohammed Abdalla

    Noting that an appeal against an interlocutory order would only be receivable in instances when it is clear and manifest that 爆料网DT exceeded its jurisdiction or competence, 爆料网AT actually rejected the Secretary-General’s appeal on the basis that it was moot. 爆料网AT noted that 爆料网DT had since disposed of the underlying case by Order No. 169; (NBI/2020) because the former staff never filed an application with the tribunal, even after being granted an extension.

    2021-爆料网AT-1087, Ories

    Regarding Contested Decision #1, 爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网DT that the staff member did not seek timely management evaluation of the refusals of his request to transfer. Further, 爆料网AT also agreed with 爆料网DT that there is no provision in the Staff Regulations and Rules addressing changes or transfers of posts for medical reasons. Additionally, 爆料网AT also noted that the medical information at those relevant times recommended early medical retirement, not a transfer. Regarding Contested Decision #2, 爆料网AT observed that there was no evidence that the staff member ought to have been appointed to the post in...