爆料网

爆料网ON

Showing 11 - 20 of 83
2010-爆料网AT-047, Attandi

爆料网AT considered both appeals by Mr Attandi, against Order No. 02 (NBI/2010) and judgment No. 爆料网DT/2010/038. 爆料网AT held that Order No. 02 (NBI/2010) was a directive to the Appellant and not a judgment against which an appeal could be filed. 爆料网AT held that an appeal against the Order was not receivable because it was not a final judgment rendered by 爆料网DT. Regarding judgment No. 爆料网DT/2010/038, 爆料网AT held that although the appeal was certainly receivable as the Appellant's case was struck out, there was no merit in his contentions. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to complete his appeal...

2010-爆料网AT-064, Kasmani

爆料网AT stated that an Application for Interpretation is not receivable if its actual purpose is to have 爆料网AT re-examine its decision, even though its judgments are final and without appeal, or to have it comment on its decision. 爆料网AT held that the applications made under subparagraphs (a) to (g) of paragraph 30 of the appeal, with the purpose of either calling into question the decision or having 爆料网AT issue comments on the decision, were not receivable. 爆料网AT held that the use of the word “annul” would not lead to confusion in the mind of a party in good faith because the language of...

2010-爆料网AT-014, Luvai

爆料网AT preliminarily denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing, determining that there was no need for further evidence, and then considered the appeal. 爆料网AT held that the minor errors in the promotion process prejudiced no one’s rights, especially in that, while it is much better practice to do so, the Appellant cited no authority requiring the listing of the exact number of positions available in the vacancy announcement. 爆料网AT also affirmed the findings of fact by 爆料网DT, including that the Appellant well knew the numbers of vacancies, and there was no individual prejudice to him in the...

2010-爆料网AT-011, Kasmani

爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT noted that the exclusion of the right to appeal a decision on the suspension of action on an administrative is an exception to the general principle of law and must be narrowly interpreted. 爆料网AT held that this exception can only be applied to jurisdictional decisions ordering the suspension of implementation of an administrative decision when a management evaluation is ongoing. 爆料网AT accordingly held that 爆料网AT exceeded its competence when it ordered the suspension of the present action until the judgment on the merits of the Appellant’s...

2010-爆料网AT-006, Hussein

爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s appeal and upheld 爆料网DT’s judgment. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant’s request that her challenge of the first recruitment process be placed in abeyance until completion of the second recruitment process was unusual and rightly declined by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that no right of the Appellant was infringed upon, as she had not been denied an opportunity to compete for the post in question. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed 爆料网DT’s judgment.

2011-爆料网AT-117, Lutta

The Appellant appealed the amount of compensation awarded for loss of chance. 爆料网AT noted that there was no set way for the trial court to set damages for loss of chance of promotion and that each case turned on its facts. 爆料网AT noted that it would generally defer to the trial court’s discretion. 爆料网AT did not accept the Appellant’s argument that the trial court was required to assess the percentage chances that he would have been selected: 爆料网AT held that while it had approved that procedure as one method of assessing damages, it respected the opinion of the trial judge as to how to determine...

2011-爆料网AT-127, Luvai

爆料网AT considered the application for revision of judgment No. 2010-爆料网AT-014 by Mr Luvai. 爆料网AT considered the allegation that the Legal Officer who was assigned to the case before 爆料网DT was a Facebook “friend” of Judge Boolell, the then 爆料网DT President, and of a few other people who could have been tangentially involved in the issues of the underlying dispute and that Judge Boolell somehow influenced the judge sitting on the instant case to rule improperly. 爆料网AT held that Mr Luvai offered not a shred of proof of anything improper. 爆料网AT denied the application.

2012-爆料网AT-194, Kamunyi

爆料网AT considered Mr Kamynyi’s appeal and the Secretary-General’s cross-appeal. 爆料网AT rejected Mr Kamunyi’s appeal in its entirety and held that it is within the Administration’s discretion to reassign a staff member to a different post at the same level and that such a reassignment is lawful if it is reasonable in the particular circumstances of each case and if it causes no economic prejudice to the staff member. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT rightfully rejected Mr Kamunyi’s request for legal costs, noting that no legal costs were owed to a party when the opposing party had not abused the process. With...

2013-爆料网AT-306, Ming Wu

爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr Wu and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that the cross-appeal was receivable, despite it being a default judgment and the Secretary-General not having been allowed to participate in the proceedings or to file a reply. 爆料网AT held that the application was not receivable ratione materiae on the basis that he had not made a timely request for management evaluation. 爆料网AT held that therefore 爆料网DT had no jurisdiction to address the merits of the claims in the application and those claims were not properly before 爆料网AT for consideration. 爆料网AT held that...