爆料网

爆料网RWA DT RoP

  • Article 11
  • Article 11.1
  • Article 12
  • Article 12.2
  • Article 13
  • Article 13.1
  • Article 13.2
  • Article 13.3
  • Article 13.5
  • Article 14
  • Article 25
  • Article 29
  • Article 3.1
  • Article 3.4
  • Article 3.5
  • Article 30
  • Article 4.4
  • Article 5
  • Article 6.1
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.2
    • Showing 21 - 30 of 31
    2015-爆料网AT-564, El-Shobaky

    爆料网AT held that, while it may be argued that the Appellant did not request her transfer to Amman, she consented to it, and the transfer was effected for her personal convenience. 爆料网AT held that the text of 爆料网RWA Area Staff Rule 107. 9 was clear and that 爆料网RWA DT correctly concluded that she was not entitled to the payment which she sought. 爆料网AT held that, contrary to the Appellant’s submissions, 爆料网RWA DT did not exclude her evidence. Recalling the broad discretion of 爆料网RWA DT to ascertain the weight to attach to the evidence before it, 爆料网AT noted that 爆料网RWA found that the Appellant’s evidence...

    2015-爆料网AT-504, Hassan

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant raised the same issues he raised before 爆料网RWA DT and did not identify how the judgment was in any way defective. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not identify any of the required grounds of appeal and failed to demonstrate that 爆料网RWA DT committed any error of fact or law in arriving at its decision. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s case was fully and fairly considered by 爆料网RWA DT and found no error of law or fact in its decision. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.

    2016-爆料网AT-687, Mohanna

    爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing prior to consideration of the appeal. 爆料网AT also rejected the Appellant's claim that 爆料网RWA DT was biased in ordering that the five applications be consolidated into a single judgment. With respect to the appeal itself, 爆料网AT held that the appeal of the decisions denying disability benefits and finding the non-payment of termination claim not receivable, had no legal basis. Regarding the Appellant’s challenge to the Commissioner-General’s decision to render the findings of the medical board moot and not to pay him a disability benefit...

    2017-爆料网AT-779, Abu Hweidi et al.

    Ar爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT’s decision not to hold an oral hearing was a shortcoming since the parties had not agreed to the case being decided on the papers and the facts needed to be established by witnesses and/or further documentary evidence. On the question of bias and its possible bearing on the outcome of the selection process, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT should have engaged in a thorough examination of the facts, rather than drawing an inference. 爆料网AT held that the inference drawn by 爆料网RWA DT, that it was realistic to conclude that not all of the posts could be filled by suitable candidates...

    2017-爆料网AT-773, Ali

    爆料网AT found no error in the 爆料网RWA DT finding that the application was not receivable ratione temporis. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s contention that 爆料网RWA DT erred in that it examined the timeliness of his application sua sponte, without it having been raised by the Respondent, holding that the competence of 爆料网RWA DT to review the observance of the statutory deadlines for filing an application can be exercised even if the parties or the administrative authorities do not raise the issue because it constitutes a matter of law and the 爆料网RWA DT Statute prevents 爆料网RWA DT from receiving a case which...

    2018-爆料网AT-879, Nimer

    爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not commit an error of procedure such as to affect the decision of the case by failing to order the Agency to allow the participation of the Appellant representative in the oral hearing or by failing to accommodate the latter’s employment situation. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not err on a question of fact, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision when it determined that the Head of Education Department (H/ED) had not received the Appellant’s request for SLWOP and, consequently, that there had not...

    2020-爆料网AT-1022, El Shanti

    爆料网AT considered two appeals (consolidated) by Mr ElShanti of judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2019/051 and judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2019/065 respectively. On the consolidation of the cases, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had broad discretion in managing its cases and that it would only intervene in clear cases of denial of due process of law affecting a party’s right to produce evidence. Accordingly, 爆料网AT rejected Mr ElShanti’s arguments against consolidation. 爆料网AT held that there was no merit to Mr ElShanti’s claims that the characterization of the impugned administrative decision was incorrect, noting that 爆料网RWA...

    2021-爆料网AT-1185, null 爆料网RWA

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Commissioner-General and a cross-appeal by Ms. Kaddoura. 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT Judgment in part. It only vacated the referral of the former Commissioner-General for accountability, finding that it was not adequate to rely on hearsay to refer a former staff member, be it the former Commissioner-General or any other, to accountability. 爆料网AT further held that there was no possibility of imposing a disciplinary measure on a former staff member, and as such any such referral would be ineffectual.

    2021-爆料网AT-1153, Ali Abdel Mon’em Aref Al Khatib

    It was a reasonable exercise of the Commissioner-General’s discretion to determine that intentionally abusing a position of power and trust against a beneficiary of 爆料网RWA in a vulnerable situation rendered Mr. Al Khatib unfit for further service with the Agency, and separation from service without termination indemnity was neither unfair nor disproportionate to the seriousness of the offence.