爆料网

MONUSCO

Showing 51 - 60 of 221
2017-爆料网AT-724, Mihai

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that although 爆料网DT did not expressly rescind the impugned decision to withdraw the offer of appointment, the award of compensation in lieu of rescission could be read as an implied order of rescission. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT gave no reasoning for the calculation of compensation, nor did it specify what amount corresponded to in-lieu compensation and what amount as compensation for loss of opportunity. 爆料网AT awarded three months’ net base salary as compensation in lieu of rescission of the impugned decision to withdraw the offer of...

2017-爆料网AT-723, Chhikara

As a preliminary issue, Mr Chhikara brought a motion seeking leave to adduce additional evidence in the form of an affidavit setting out his credentials for the post and credentials of the selected candidate, claiming that he was not aware that this information was relevant at the time he made his initial submissions. 爆料网AT refused this motion on the basis that no exceptional circumstances were demonstrated and that Mr Chhikara’s explanation that he only realized the relevance of additional evidence after the 爆料网DT decision did not escape the fact that it was known to him at the time. As another...

2017-爆料网AT-741, Mobanga

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT noted that both parties agreed that a redaction of name would only be justified if the 爆料网DT’s judgment was affirmed. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred when it considered that the identification of Mr. Mobanga by the complainant in the photo array was not reliable on the basis that the use of MONUSCO grounds passes in the array may have influenced the complainant. Noting that all of the photos were marked “MONUSCO” and so it did not stand out or influence anyone, 爆料网AT held that the photographs constituted evidence that...

2017-爆料网AT-750, Kagizi et al.

爆料网AT consolidated the 51 appeals into seven groups heard by seven judicial panels, the first group (Kagizi et al. judgment No. 爆料网DT/2016/131) being heard by the full bench. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals. 爆料网AT confirmed 爆料网DT’s finding that the appellants lacked standing to challenge the non-renewal of their appointments in so far as they were deemed to be a direct challenge against the General Assembly’s decision to abolish the posts. 爆料网AT noted that, while in other aspects, 爆料网DT regarded the applications as receivable and dealt with the merits of the case, those findings were not substantially...

2017-爆料网AT-756, Nkashama et al.

爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore 爆料网AT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.

2017-爆料网AT-755, Ramazani et al.

爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore 爆料网AT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.

2017-爆料网AT-754, Kisubi et al.

爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore 爆料网AT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.

2017-爆料网AT-753, Kiluwe et al.

爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore 爆料网AT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.

2017-爆料网AT-752, Baguma et al.

爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and 爆料网AT, therefore, adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.

2017-爆料网AT-751, Wanza et al.

爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual differences nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al.). 爆料网AT, therefore, adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment in paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.