爆料网

Due process

  • Access to justice
  • Delay
  • Investigation
  • Right to a hearing
  • Right to appeal
  • Right to comment/respond
  • Right to confront complainant
    • Showing 71 - 80 of 202
    2015-爆料网AT-580, Kalil

    爆料网AT considered an appeal against Order No. 057 (爆料网RWA/DT/2014) and judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2014/027. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s request for confidentiality and for the redaction of his name from the 爆料网RWA DT judgment and affirmed 爆料网RWA DT’s reasoning. 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request to submit new evidence to 爆料网AT on the basis that the Appellant did not offer any explanation as to why he was precluded from filing them previously, exceptional circumstances did not exist, and its content would not have affected the decision of the case. 爆料网AT held that it was for 爆料网RWA DT to consider that it...

    2015-爆料网AT-569, Pio

    爆料网AT held that there was nothing arbitrary about the impugned decision of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), 爆料网JSPF, as it was based on reports by the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund between July 2011 and February 2013. 爆料网AT held that good reason had been established for the CEO to decide on 31 July 2011 as the proper date for the suspension of the two-track system in Argentina, notwithstanding that there were previous statements regarding the reliability of the consumer price index (CPI) data in Argentina. 爆料网AT held that it was satisfied that such a decision was a proper...

    2015-爆料网AT-535, Rangel

    爆料网AT had before it three decisions of the Conciliation Committee: the first regarding the establishment of two inquiry panels, Panel One and Panel Two; the second in respect of the decision to place the Appellant on administrative leave with pay, and the third concerning the decision to separate her from service. As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT did not admit to the case file two motions submitted by the Appellant subsequent to the issuance of judgment No. 2015-爆料网AT-531, as 爆料网AT held that the documents that she sought to adduce would not assist 爆料网AT with its consideration on the merits. By way of...

    2015-爆料网AT-525, Flores

    爆料网AT considered both an appeal by Ms Flores requesting an increase in compensation and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in either determining that there were procedural violations that warranted rescission of the separation decision or in its determination that Ms Flores was not entitled to reinstatement (justifying a material award) as her contract was due to expire shortly after receipt of the dismissal letter. 爆料网AT noted that Ms Flores was not informed prior to the interview what the allegations were. Noting that the records indicated that Ms Flores...

    2015-爆料网AT-514, Abu Nada

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly determined that it did not have jurisdiction to review the decision to suspend him without pay. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was alert to the injury which the prolonged delay caused the Appellant. On the Appellant’s complaint that 爆料网RWA DT did not address his complaint regarding the deduction by 爆料网RWA from his personal Provident Fund contributions upon his dismissal, apparently, to recoup an overpayment, 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the complaint and the Appellant failed to demonstrate any error of law or fact on the part of the 爆料网RWA DT when it determined these...

    2015-爆料网AT-512, Kadri

    爆料网AT held that the nature of the contested decision before 爆料网DT was not entirely clear. On the 爆料网DT’s finding that the Appellant had not adduced any evidence in support of his claim that the Settlement Agreement was imposed upon him by duress and threats, and therefore must fail, 爆料网AT found no error of law or fact in the decision and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment on this point. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT failed to deal with the Appellant’s claim of harassment and discrimination. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s right to due process entitlement him to a fair hearing and a fully reasoned judgment of his...

    2016-爆料网AT-640, Diatta

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not address any error of fact or law in the 爆料网DT judgment. 爆料网AT held that the irregularities in the procedure did not amount to a breach of the Appellant’s due process rights. 爆料网AT held that it was irrelevant whether the Appellant filed his application before 爆料网DT in the interests of justice or seeking an award of moral damages since there was no evidence of damages. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

    2016-爆料网AT-633, Bharati

    爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT had not addressed the Appellant’s request for an extension of time but had rather converted sua sponte the request into an incomplete application and summarily adjudged the application as not receivable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT could not have converted sua sponte the Appellant’s request for more time into an application. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not afforded the Appellant the opportunity to file an application and had committed several procedural errors, exceeded its jurisdiction and competence, and violated the Appellant’s due process rights. 爆料网AT vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and...

    2016-爆料网AT-632, Jaishankar

    爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT had not addressed the Appellant’s request for an extension of time but had rather converted sua sponte the request into an incomplete application and summarily adjudged the application as not receivable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT could not have converted sua sponte the Appellant’s request for more time into an application. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not afforded the Appellant the opportunity to file an application and had committed several procedural errors, exceeded its jurisdiction and competence, and violated the Appellant’s due process rights. 爆料网AT vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and...

    2016-爆料网AT-631, Thomas et al.

    爆料网AT considered the appeal from Thomas et al. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT had not addressed the Appellants’ request for an extension of time but had rather converted sua sponte the request into incomplete applications and summarily adjudged their applications as not receivable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT could not have converted sua sponte the Appellants’ request for more time into applications. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not afforded the Appellants the opportunity to file an application and had committed several procedural errors, exceeded its jurisdiction and competence, and violated the Appellants’ due...