±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in failing to consider adequately the Appellant¡¯s evidence, noting she was not given the opportunity to prove her case, including allegations of discrimination, at the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT hearing, which included the opportunity to call evidence and to challenge the Administration¡¯s evidence. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in law in allowing testimony to be given at the hearing that was neither sworn, affirmed, nor made under a promise, to tell the truth. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT allowed the appeal, set aside the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment and ordered reinstatement or the award of compensation in lieu of reinstatement in...

Ms. Azzouni filed an application for revision of judgment No. 2020-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-081 for clarification of the date upon which the two years¡¯ net base salary was to be calculated and requested that it be set as of the date of the judgment, or, alternatively, that an interest rate be applied to the compensation awarded from the date of separation to that of the judgment. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it would treat the application as an application for interpretation under Article 11(3) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute. On the basis that the purpose of compensation is to place a staff member in the same position he or she would...