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 81 - 90 of 1867
    2025-爆料网AT-1529, Olexandr Maruschak

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT had erred by failing to grant the remedy under Article 10(5)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute after it had found that the disciplinary decision was unlawful. The 爆料网DT erred by refusing to rescind the contested decision on the grounds that the staff member had abused the judicial process. The 爆料网AT remanded the case to the 爆料网DT for determination of the appropriate remedy.

    The 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT that the former staff member had manifestly abused the judicial process by filing forged documents before that Tribunal. However, the 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT had erred in the...

    2025-爆料网AT-1517, Ayesha Al Rifai

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT did not err in finding that there was clear and convincing evidence to support that the applicant had engaged in abuse of authority by intimidating a staff member to file a false complaint of sexual harassment against another staff member. The 爆料网RWA DT weighed the conflicting testimonies and assessed the credibility of the witnesses and found that she had a motive to solicit the false complaint.

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT did not err in declining to review the other misconduct allegations against her, given that the abuse of authority allegation was the...

    爆料网DT/2025/012, Igor Kulga

    The Tribunal rejected the Applicant’s arguments and found that the decision to recover a portion of the Applicant’s Home Leave lump sum was lawful.

    The Applicant manifestly abused the judicial review process by filing a frivolous application. The Applicant repeatedly lied to the Administration for over six months in seeking to obtain and keep a Home Leave lump sum payment to which he was not entitled.

    Still seeking to keep the lump sum in full, he filed an application with the Tribunal. In his application, and his subsequent submissions, the Applicant repeated his lies and even expanded upon...

    063 (NBI/2025), George Lwanda

     

    1. The Tribunal noted that, in his reply, the Respondent informed the Tribunal that he had voluntarily decided to extend the Applicant’s appointment through 30 June 2025. As an annex to the reply, the Respondent provided a copy of the Applicant’s Personnel Action, indicating that his appointment had been extended to 30 June 2025.

    2. The Tribunal thus held that, in light of the above, the Applicant’s request for suspension of the implementation of the contested administrative decision had become moot. The Tribunal, therefore, did not find it necessary to examine whether...

    爆料网DT/2025/048, Zainab El-Sibaii

     

    The Tribunal observed that unlike the Applicant’s First Reporting Officer’s (“FRO”) comments which were entirely consistent with the ePAS rating of “Successfully Meets Expectations”, the comments of the Applicant’s Second Reporting Officer (“SRO”) seriously undercut and detract from the overall appraisal rating." The Tribunal further noted that after the initial sentence recognizing that the Applicant “consistently performed her tasks and duties effectively” and commending her “ambition and dedication in her role, the SRO added seven sentences which were completely negative about the...

    2025-爆料网AT-1539, Desire Hatungimana

    The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT acted correctly by conducting a judicial review of the case.

    It found that the 爆料网DT properly assessed the credibility of the witnesses who testified before it and correctly relied on the credible testimony of Ms. V, who had no motive to lie, to conclude that it had been established by clear and convincing evidence that the former staff member had sexually harassed her by making comments of a sexual nature in May and December 2020.While Ms. V’s testimony alone would have been sufficient in this context, the 爆料网AT noted that it was corroborated by colleagues who were...

    爆料网DT/2025/012, Igor Kulga

    The Tribunal rejected the Applicant’s arguments and found that the decision to recover a portion of the Applicant’s Home Leave lump sum was lawful.

    The Applicant manifestly abused the judicial review process by filing a frivolous application. The Applicant repeatedly lied to the Administration for over six months in seeking to obtain and keep a Home Leave lump sum payment to which he was not entitled.

    Still seeking to keep the lump sum in full, he filed an application with the Tribunal. In his application, and his subsequent submissions, the Applicant repeated his lies and even expanded upon...

    2025-爆料网AT-1520, Shahd Ghabbash

    The 爆料网AT noted that the staff member’s transfer request had been approved by the West Bank Field Office but the Jordan Field Office had subsequently informed that the request could not be accommodated due to a commitment to the roadmap on hiring daily-paid workers in fixed-term posts.

    The 爆料网AT held that the Commissioner-General had demonstrated the efforts made by both Field Offices to process the transfer request and the Agency’s burden to show that the request had been given full and fair consideration was satisfied. The 爆料网AT found that the staff member had not discharged the burden of...

    爆料网DT/2025/033, CLAY SHIALA NSILU

     

    The Tribunal noted that by Order No. 160 (NBI/2024) issued on 9 December 2024, it directed the Applicant to provide a copy of the contested administrative decision and proof of his management evaluation request. Whereas the Applicant filed a response to Order No. 160 (NBI/2024) on 20 December 2024, he failed to provide the requested documents. The Tribunal also observed that the Applicant failed to provide the documents up to the date of the issuance of the judgment.

    In line with the above, the Tribunal recalled that its Statute places on the Applicant the burden of establishing “non...