爆料网

Disciplinary matters / misconduct

  • Abuse of authority
  • Abuse of privileges and immunities
  • Assault (verbal and physical)
  • Breach of duties of independence, neutrality, and impartiality
  • Disciplinary measure or sanction
  • Discrimination (see category: discrimination)
  • Dismissal/separation
  • Facts (establishment of) / evidence
  • Failure to comply with private legal obligations
  • Failure to report misconduct
  • Fraud, misrepresentation and false certification
  • Gross negligence
  • Harassment (non-sexual)
  • Inappropriate or disruptive behaviour
  • Investigation (see category
  • Investigation (see category: Investigation)
  • Misuse of information and communication technology resources
  • Misuse of office
  • Misuse of official documents
  • Misuse of or failure to exercise reasonable care in relation to 爆料网 property or assets
  • Non-disciplinary/administrative measures
  • Procurement irregularities
  • Prohibited activity under ST/SGB/2004/15 (Use of Information and Communication Technology Resources and Data)
  • Proportionality of sanction
  • Retaliation
  • Sexual exploitation and abuse
  • Sexual harassment
  • Theft and misappropriation
  • Unauthorised outside activities and conflict of interest
  • Violation of local laws
    • Showing 321 - 330 of 722
    2016-爆料网AT-650, Nielsen

    爆料网AT rejected the request for an oral hearing, finding that it was not necessary or would assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case. With regards to the motion to extend the Appellant’s rights as a staff member, 爆料网AT held that there were no exceptional circumstances that would warrant the granting of the motion and the motion was essentially an attempt to supplement arguments already made in the appeal submissions. With regards to the motion to have 爆料网AT remove immunity from certain staff members should her appeal fail, 爆料网AT held that the motion was entirely misconceived, as such...

    2016-爆料网AT-623, Abdullah

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate evidence of exceptional circumstances to justify the need to submit new evidence or file additional pleadings and, therefore, dismissed the Appellant’s motion. 爆料网AT rejected the request for an oral hearing finding that it would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT was not required to set out its findings on every submission presented by the Appellant and the failure to do so did not amount to an error on the part of the 爆料网RWA DT. 爆料网AT upheld the order of 爆料网RWA DT to rescind the contested...

    2016-爆料网AT-612, Dawas

    爆料网AT considered the appeal by the 爆料网RWA Commissioner-General. 爆料网AT confirmed the findings and conclusions of the 爆料网RWA DT judgment under appeal about the illegality of the closure of the investigation into the staff member’s complaints. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had thoroughly conducted the judicial review of the challenged administrative decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had conducted a legitimate exercise when it drew its conclusions from the investigation report. 爆料网AT held that the irregularities, such as the failure to address the specific harassment complaint, several examples of abuse of...

    2017-爆料网AT-806, Maloof

    爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT properly dismissed the Appellant’s claims in relation to the non-renewal of his appointment and his reassignment as not receivable as they were time-barred. On the cancellation of his administrative leave, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly found that there was no adverse decision affecting his conditions of employment. 爆料网AT held that the decision to terminate the administrative leave and not to pursue disciplinary action was not an administrative decision in that it did not have any adverse legal consequences or impact for the Appellant. 爆料网AT held that the decision to...

    2017-爆料网AT-797, Benamar

    爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing on the basis that it would be neither necessary nor useful since the relevant facts were clear, the witness was already heard by 爆料网DT (by audio conference) as verified by 爆料网AT, the unusual context of the case was insufficient to indicate that any fact or issue could be refined by specific testimony and it would not assist 爆料网AT with the expeditious and fair disposal of the case. On the Appellant’s motion for additional hearings, 爆料网AT held that the documents contained arguments already submitted, although phrased differently, and no...

    2017-爆料网AT-782, Muindi

    爆料网AT held that the summary dismissal decision was unlawful because the due process rights under IMO’s Staff Regulations and Staff Rules were substantially violated. The Appellant had been charged with misconduct in the form of fraudulent activities undertaken to gain diplomatic accreditation, namely giving instructions to append an electronic signature to an official IMO communication without authorization or instruction by that colleague and misrepresenting his contractual status as internationally recruited in that communication. Noting that the Secretary-General of IMO considered the...

    2017-爆料网AT-781, Rajan

    爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT dismissed Mr Rajan’s motion for the appeal to be heard on an expedited basis as it had become moot as the ordinary case management constraints meant it could not have been heard any earlier. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT made an error of law in holding that the Secretary-General was obliged to prove that Mr Rajan had the intention to mislead the Organisation. 爆料网AT held that there was no doubt that Mr Rajan misrepresented the true situation more than once. 爆料网AT held that it was Mr Rajan’s responsibility to ascertain that he was providing accurate...

    2017-爆料网AT-786, Auda

    爆料网AT considered appeals by both the Secretary-General and Mr Auda. Noting that the Administration had not failed to respond, albeit with inordinate delay, and then had set up a second fact-finding panel, 爆料网AT held that a decision may only be challenged in the context of an appeal after the conclusion of the entire process and that the step Mr Auda was challenging was preliminary in nature. 爆料网AT held that the contested issue, namely the decision of the first fact-finding panel to delay, withhold and not submit its report and records, ceased to exist when Mr Auda was notified of the outcome of...

    2017-爆料网AT-774, Awe

    爆料网AT held, agreeing with 爆料网DT, that the Administration should have removed the offending minutes, written to all recipients of the minutes withdrawing the damaging allegations against Mr. Awe, and/or simply forwarded the fact-finding panel’s report to the participants of the SMT meeting and recipients of the minutes. 爆料网AT held that the reprimand in the offender’s file and the private apology did not constitute appropriate relief for the restoration of Mr. Awe’s reputation and career. 爆料网AT considered that any action was taken against Mr. Rutgers (managerial or disciplinary) could have only...

    2017-爆料网AT-776, Ibrahim

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Mr Ibrahim. 爆料网AT held, agreeing with 爆料网DT, that there was nothing illegal or warranting compensation in the investigation process and the investigation was not vitiated by procedural error or improper motive. Accordingly, 爆料网AT dismissed the cross-appeal. 爆料网AT held that the bottle of wine disappeared immediately after Mr Ibrahim had handled it for the second time in front of the camera and then with his back obstructing the camera. 爆料网AT held that, apart from the direct link between the manipulation of the bottle of wine by...