爆料网

MONUSCO

Showing 61 - 70 of 221
2018-爆料网AT-866, Gnassou

爆料网AT considered whether 爆料网DT erred in concluding that the decision not to renew the Appellant’s appointment and to separate her from service on the basis that she failed to sign the letters of appointment containing the extensions of her fixed-term appointment was lawful. 爆料网AT noted that when a performance shortcoming is identified, remedial actions may be put in place and if the shortcoming is not rectified, a PIP shall be prepared. 爆料网AT further noted that, in the absence of any explicit provision establishing otherwise, the rebuttal process does not have the effect of suspending the...

2018-爆料网AT-865, Gnassou

爆料网AT considered whether 爆料网DT erred in law or fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision when it found that i) there was no error of procedure stemming from the delay in completing the comments on the Appellant’s rebuttal statement; and ii) the Appellant’s claim regarding the assessment and findings of the rebuttal panel together with her final performance appraisal did not result in a challengeable administrative decision. 爆料网AT found that, because no explanation was provided for the initial and relevant delay, 爆料网DT erred in concluding that the reasons given by the administration...

2018-爆料网AT-824, Mbok

爆料网AT denied the request for an oral hearing. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in finding that the Appellant should have requested a management evaluation of decision on or before 16 December 2014 and that he did not do so until 3 January 2017. 爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网DT that the application was not receivable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

2019-爆料网AT-973, Gisage

MOn the issue of receivability, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in concluding that the application was receivable in its entirety, as each of the three decisions taken on ALWOP were distinct and the Appellant failed to seek management evaluation of the first and second decisions. 爆料网AT held the application was only receivable ratione materiae in respect of the third and last decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s finding that no exceptional circumstances existed to warrant the extension of the Appellant’s ALWOP was a material error of law. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in concluding that 12 months ALWOP was...

2019-爆料网AT-946, Tosi

Following an appeal by the Appellant and the Secretary-General, there was a further cross-appeal by the Appellant. As a preliminary issue, 爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s cross-appeal as not receivable since the Appellant has already had the opportunity to file his own independent appeal and the cross-appeal seemed to be an attempt to complement his appeal. On the Secretary-General’s appeal in Case No. 爆料网DT/NBI/2015/095 related to the issue settlement agreement, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred on a matter of law on the receivability of the application, since it based its finding on the merits as a...

2020-爆料网AT-1077, Domitila Icha

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not failed to properly exercise its jurisdiction by refusing to convene a second case management discussion. 爆料网AT held that, regarding the question of whether 爆料网DT failed to address the Appellant’s factual arguments challenging the legality of the abolition of her post, the appeal was without merit; the Appellant only reargued her case and did not establish that 爆料网DT erred in fact or in law about this issue. 爆料网AT held, however, that 爆料网DT erred in deciding that the Appellant had failed to rebut the presumption that the selection of Mr. D R-B, given that the selected...

2020-爆料网AT-1074, Patsy Bello

爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not contest the decision to separate her from the Organisation, thus the SAB was not seized with her separation and her appeal on that issue was not receivable. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s claims for compensation for pain, suffering, and medical expenses were beyond the scope of the case and therefore not receivable. 爆料网AT held that the IMO Secretary-General’s decision to place the Appellant on sick leave was based on sound medical evidence which was not rebutted at the time and that there was no basis to set aside that decision. 爆料网AT held there was no basis...

2020-爆料网AT-1073, Erik Kennes

爆料网AT affirmed 爆料网DT’s position regarding the moment the Appellant knew or reasonably should have known of the content and finality of the decision and that it triggered the time limit to request management evaluation. 爆料网AT further affirmed 爆料网DT’s position that the Appellant’s request for management evaluation was time-barred. 爆料网AT, however, noted that 爆料网DT should have found the application not receivable ratione materiae, which is the case if there is no timely request for management evaluation, rather than ratione temporis. 爆料网AT further noted that this error by 爆料网DT did not adversely affect...

2020-爆料网AT-1014, Chhikara

爆料网AT held that the reason upon which 爆料网DT decided not to rescind the contested decision, i. e. the lapse of time, was insufficient justification. 爆料网AT held that, given the grossly negligent illegalities in which the selection process was conducted as found by 爆料网DT, rescission of the contested decision was mandatory and could not be avoided on the basis of the excessive length of time between the filing of the application and the 爆料网DT judgment. 爆料网AT held that allowing the decision not to select the Appellant to remain in effect as if it was correct, despite its clear illegality, was not...

2020-爆料网AT-979, Igunda

爆料网AT considered an appeal of Order No. 079. 爆料网AT held that, regardless of whether 爆料网DT may have committed an error of law, fact, or procedure, Article 2(2) of the 爆料网DT Statute precluded an appeal to 爆料网AT if 爆料网DT acted within its jurisdiction or competence. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT acted within its jurisdiction or competence. 爆料网AT held that the appeal was not receivable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT Order.