爆料网

爆料网RWA Area Staff Circulars

  • Circular 06/2009
  • Circular A/04/2014
  • Circular A/07/2020
  • Circular A/6/2018
  • General Staff Circular 07/10
  • General Staff Circular GSC 03/2022
  • General Staff Circular GSC 06/2010
  • PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022
    • Showing 11 - 16 of 16
    2012-爆料网AT-269, Hamad

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT was correct in applying Former 爆料网RWA Area Staff Rule 106. 1. 16 to calculate the interest applicable to the Appellant’s pay-out and that 爆料网RWA DT had not erred in this regard. 爆料网AT held that the contention that the Administrative Rules of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund apply to the Appellant’s situation had no merit and had been raised for the first time on appeal. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that 爆料网RWA DT had erred in finding that the Appellant’s terms and conditions of employment are governed solely and exclusively by the Agency...

    2013-爆料网AT-304, Al Surkhi et al.

    爆料网AT held that the relevant Circular contained all the necessary components to give rise to legal consequences for the striking staff and that it had individual application. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT committed no legal error when it decided that the relevant administrative decision for the purpose of former Area Staff Rule 111.3 was the decision communicated by way of the Circular and that 爆料网RWA DT correctly determined the terminus a quo for the purpose of computing the time for requesting administrative review. 爆料网AT upheld the 爆料网RWA DT’s determination as to the limits of its jurisdiction. 爆料网AT...

    2019-爆料网AT-911, El-Arqan

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT committed an error of fact in stating that the OPT Allowance was paid in local currency, which led 爆料网RWA DT to commit an error of law in stating that Area Staff Circular No. A/04/2014 was applicable. 爆料网AT held that Area Staff Circular No. A/04/2014 was only applicable to the Jerusalem Allowance and not the OPT Allowance, which was paid in US Dollars. 爆料网AT held that such an error of law would be inconsequential if its second line of reasoning, that no rule or policy requires the CAF be applied to the OPT Allowance, was correct. 爆料网AT held that there was no rule requiring...

    2021-爆料网AT-1183, Iyad Youssef Zaqout

    爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网RWA DT that the contested decision was a lawful exercise of discretion. Regarding the Appellant’s claim that the process was tainted because of the lapse of time since the complained of behavior occurred (ten years) and because of the hearsay nature of the evidence, 爆料网AT explained that these same arguments were made both to the DT and to the Administration during the investigation phase. The Tribunal agreed with the 爆料网RWA DT that there was sufficient corroborating evidence to back the allegations. The Tribunal also noted that it is within the 爆料网RWA DT’s role to review...

    2021-爆料网AT-1161, Asr Ahmed Toson

    爆料网AT held 爆料网DT erred in law with regard to its finding that the second decision to renew the Appellant’s fixed-term appointment superseded the first decision to renew his appointment (the challenged decision). Nevertheless, 爆料网AT held that this finding was not dispositive of the appeal in the Appellant’s favour, as his application was not receivable on the grounds of another basis of mootness. 爆料网AT held that the contested decision to renew his fixed-term appointment by three months instead of two years did not constitute an appealable administrative decision for the simple reason that the...