±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. On receivability, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT opined that it doubted whether the application was receivable, but due to some uncertainties and because the matter was of general interest, it would decide the case on the merits. On the merits, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in law in finding that Ms Haq and Ms Kane had a fundamental right to be fully and accurately informed about their pension entitlements at the time of their appointments. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in law in failing to consider that Staff Regulation 4. 1 does not oblige the Secretary-General to transmit...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT committed an error of fact in stating that the OPT Allowance was paid in local currency, which led ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT to commit an error of law in stating that Area Staff Circular No. A/04/2014 was applicable. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT 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. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT 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. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that there was no rule requiring...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered Mr Newland¡¯s application for interpretation of judgment No. 2018-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-820. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that, given that Mr Newland had already been paid Special Post Allowance, Hazard pay, and outstanding interest, the only questions requiring determination were whether he was entitled to payment of Rest and Recuperation (R&R), free tickets, and the relocation grant. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT accepted that there was a degree of uncertainty regarding these questions. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Mr Newland¡¯s claim that he was entitled to the payment of R&R was unsustainable, as it was not an accruable benefit or entitlement. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT exceeded its competence in reviewing Mr Omwanda¡¯s EOD date, as it was not subject to a timely request for management evaluation. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Mr Omwanda knew or ought to have known from his Letter of Appointment the date from which his appointment was effective, that he had been re-employed, not reinstated, and that its terms applied regardless of any period of former service. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was statutorily barred from hearing Mr Omwanda¡¯s application. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT upheld the appeal and vacated the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT rejected the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA Commissioner-General's submission that the appeal was defective because it failed to identify any of the grounds of appeal prescribed by Article 2(1) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant¡¯s ground of appeal was without merit. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Commissioner-General was obliged to calculate the Appellant¡¯s retirement benefits in accordance with the new Staff Rule and did so correctly. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT did not commit any error of fact and law in arriving at its decision. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT judgment.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the appeal was receivable on the basis that the Appellant was not challenging the new scheme for education grant introduced by the General Assembly, but rather the manner in which it was implemented in her specific case and the way in which the Secretary-General interpreted General Assembly Resolution 70/244. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in deciding that the Appellant did not have an acquired right to all of the previous education benefits she had enjoyed. On the question of the Appellant¡¯s access to a discretionary consideration of her claims on exceptional grounds, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant did not contest the decision to separate her from the Organisation, thus the SAB was not seized with her separation and her appeal on that issue was not receivable. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant¡¯s claims for compensation for pain, suffering, and medical expenses were beyond the scope of the case and therefore not receivable. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the IMO Secretary-General¡¯s decision to place the Appellant on sick leave was based on sound medical evidence which was not rebutted at the time and that there was no basis to set aside that decision. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held there was no basis...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that a SPA can only be granted if the conditions of ST/AI/1999/17 are met, inter alia, that the staff member has been assigned to and discharged the full functions of a post which has been both classified and budgeted at a higher level, and that these prerequisites were not met. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the denial of the ex gratia payment was lawful. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Administration did not commit any errors in exercising its discretion. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the denial of an ex gratia payment did not violate the principle of equal pay for equal value and did not constitute discrimination. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that exceptional circumstances existed on the basis that the Appellant was suffering from a medical condition, hospitalized and unable to file the appeal on a timely basis. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT waived the deadline for appeal and held the appeal to be receivable. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that, in his appeal, the Appellant largely repeated the submissions and allegations raised before ±¬ÁÏÍøDT, without identifying the specific errors of law or errors of fact that resulted in a manifestly unreasonable decision. On the Appellant¡¯s claims relating to the use of and access to the closed-circuit television (CCTV) video...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s language, which was strongly critical of the Appellant, was unwarranted. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in finding that the decision to discontinue the payment of her SPA was a legitimate exercise of the Administration¡¯s discretion, as the Appellant no longer met the requirements for it. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the discontinuation of the SPA was justified in view of the Administration¡¯s obligation and right to correct such an erroneous situation. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment.