±¬ÁÏÍø

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the reclassification request was made by ±¬ÁÏÍøIFIL and not by the staff member.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that although extensive delays occurred before the request for reclassification was determined by the Administration, no final reclassification decision had been taken at the time the application was filed to the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT by the staff member. Accordingly, since no decision had been made yet, she could not have experienced a direct adverse effect on the terms of her appointment. The fact that there were delays in the reclassification decision does not change the analysis. It is a...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had appropriately relied on the clear and convincing evidence to conclude that the staff member had submitted a medical insurance claim to Cigna for medical services that had never been provided.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the evidence established that it was highly probable that the staff member had made the misrepresentation to Cigna with the intent to deceive and that his actions had been potentially prejudicial to the ±¬ÁÏÍøDP which was subject to any loss from undue reimbursements.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the staff member¡¯s certification to Cigna of the correctness of the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the staff member publicly engaged in acts of a sexual nature in a clearly marked United Nations vehicle, bringing disrepute to the Organization and difficulties with the host country.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the case was not one where the issues required the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s determination of the credibility of contradicting testimonies of parties or witnesses and the lack of a ±¬ÁÏÍøDT hearing had not affected its decision. The ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had before it a video clip depicting the actions in question, which were clearly of a sexual nature.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT that the lawfulness of the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the staff member allowed an unauthorized female individual to board a United Nations vehicle assigned to him and to publicly commit acts of a sexual nature in the rear seat, bringing disrepute to the Organization and difficulties with the host country.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the case was not one where the issues required the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s determination of the credibility of contradicting testimonies of parties or witnesses and the lack of a ±¬ÁÏÍøDT hearing had not affected its decision. The ±¬ÁÏÍøDT appropriately considered the former staff member's admissions, as well as the video clip...

The Applicant having failed to establish any illegality, procedural irregularity, bad faith or improper motivation in the Respondent¡¯s taking of the decision not to accept her request to withdraw her resignation, the application had to fail.

Had the Respondent not exercised his discretion to reject the Applicant¡¯s request to withdraw her resignation, he would have been compelled to rescind selection decisions already communicated and accepted by three other staff members. This would have constituted a breach of the employment contracts of the three staff members. This breach would have...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the staff member.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the recommendation report did not provide any explanation to understand the rationale of the non-selection decision. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that no information had been given in the course of the judicial proceedings either as to why the external candidate was the most suitable candidate. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that, for the sake of reasonableness, fairness and transparency, it was expected from the Administration to give relevant and true reasons supporting its ultimate choice. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had made an error of fact...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General of WMO.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the staff member was seeking to adhere to an agreed variation to his contract which, in return for foreshortening his period of employment, entitled him to a termination indemnity. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had been correct in establishing a direct and negative effect, brought about by the implementation of the contested decision, as a condition for receivability.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was of the view that WMO¡¯s decision purporting to rescind its agreement affected the staff member¡¯s established career and personal...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General against Judgment No. ±¬ÁÏÍøDT/2021/032. It also considered a cross-appeal by Ms. Hilaire-Madsen claiming that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT should have rescinded the Administration¡¯s non-renewal decision and awarded her alternative compensation as well as compensation for moral damages.

As regards the lawfulness of the non-renewal decision, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that under the specific circumstances, at the material time of the contested non-renewal decision at the end of December 2018, from the point of view of a fair-minded objective observer, with the information available at...

The written reprimand

Factual basis for the imposition of the measure

±¬ÁÏÍøPAD, as an ad hoc special interest group, advocates for issues relating to conditions of work pertaining to staff members of African descent in the United Nations.

±¬ÁÏÍøOMS is established ¡°to make available confidential services of impartial and independent persons to address work-related issues of staff members¡± (see ST/SGB/2016/7 para 1.1). ±¬ÁÏÍøOMS is guided in its work by four core principles, namely independence, confidentiality, neutrality, and informality.

It appeared from the information on record that the Applicant...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT correctly exercised its broad discretion with regard to its case management in concluding that the record before it was sufficient to render a decision without an oral hearing. It concluded that the Appellant has not presented any grounds as to why an oral hearing would have been necessary and thus did not show that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT exercised its discretion in such manner as to affect the outcome of the case, as required by Article 2(1)(d) of the Appeals Tribunal Statute.

With regard to the Appellant¡¯s argument that the non-selection decision was unlawful because...