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 81 - 90 of 202
    2016-爆料网AT-630, Bhatia et al.

    爆料网AT held 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 process rights. 爆料网AT vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and...

    2016-爆料网AT-629, Prasad et al.

    爆料网AT held 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 process rights. 爆料网AT vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and...

    2016-爆料网AT-628, Taneja 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 process rights. 爆料网AT vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and...

    2018-爆料网AT-889, Sall

    爆料网AT considered the appeal of the Appellant and the cross-appeal of the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing, noting that it would not have added any further value or clarification of the factual and legal issues. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General's cross-appeal was receivable, according to Article 9(4) of the RoP. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in holding that the disciplinary investigation was flawed by procedural irregularities. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in finding that the disciplinary decision was unlawful and, accordingly, that there could neither...

    2018-爆料网AT-862, Majut

    On appeal by the Secretary-General, 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT erred in fact and in law in its finding that the facts of misconduct were not established by clear and convincing evidence. 爆料网AT noted that a proper consideration of the whole of the evidence could only have led to one conclusion, and that is that the individual assaulted the victim. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT did not consider the evidence objectively, specifically by giving misplaced importance to minor inconsistencies, coming to unreasonable conclusions on the facts which were not supported by the evidence, and making speculations instead of...

    2018-爆料网AT-861, Dahan

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the staff member arguing that 爆料网DT erred in not awarding compensation in lieu of remand to ABCC as an alternative remedy. 爆料网AT found no error in the 爆料网DT judgment not awarding in-lieu compensation. 爆料网AT held that since the Secretary-General concurred with the remand in question, the claim became moot. 爆料网AT held that a claim of gross negligence against the Administration is a separate action that could not be included in this claim. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not demonstrated that the delay had any impact on her physical or mental well-being, rejecting her...

    2018-爆料网AT-822, Elobaid

    The Secretary-General appealed. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law when it found that there was a breach of Mr Elobaid’s due process rights, as Mr Elobaid was correctly apprised of the allegations against him, which could lead to administrative action, and was afforded the opportunity to make representations against the measure taken. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in fact, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision, when it assumed that the reprimand originated from Mr Ward, of the Chief Programme Support and Management Services at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, who...

    2018-爆料网AT-817, Kisia

    The Secretary-General appealed. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred on a question of law when it concluded that the procedure was flawed on the basis that it was not sufficient for the Assistant Secretary-General/Controller to countersign and approve the 爆料网CB recommendation and that a separate and reasoned decision was necessary for the regularity of the administrative procedure. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in finding that there was a procedural delay and, therefore, granting compensation. 爆料网AT granted the appeal and vacated the 爆料网DT judgment insofar as it awarded compensation for the procedural...

    2019-爆料网AT-960, Abdeljalil

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s case was fully and fairly considered by 爆料网RWA DT. 爆料网AT found no error of law in 爆料网RWA DT’s decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT properly reviewed the contested decision in accordance with the applicable law. 爆料网AT held that the non-extension of the limited duration contract was a result of the elimination of her post due to a lack of funds, which constituted a valid reason proffered by the Administration for not renewing her appointment. 爆料网AT held that, by applying objective criteria in the reduction of the staffing levels, 爆料网RWA adhered to the principles of equality...

    2019-爆料网AT-956, Ladu

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err and that clear and convincing evidence established that the Appellant participated in an attempted taking of property belonging to the Organisation. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in concluding that the disciplinary sanction of dismissal from service was proportionate and lawful. On the Appellant’s claim that the items were “garbage”, 爆料网AT held that this claim was entirely without merit as the evidence showed that the items included over USD 5,000 worth of material, including boxes of new floor tiles. On the Appellant’s claim that 爆料网DT failed to fully assess...