爆料网

WFP

Showing 1 - 10 of 23
2011-爆料网AT-118, Abu-Hawaila

爆料网AT was not persuaded that 爆料网DT erred in its judgment. 爆料网AT held that, at the time of receipt of his settlement offer, the time limit to file the application to 爆料网DT had already run for approximately three weeks and nothing prevented the Appellant from filing his application or applying for a waiver or extension of the time limit. 爆料网AT held that the exceptional suspension of time limits provided for under Article 8(1) of the 爆料网DT Statute and provisional Staff Rule 11. 1 applied only to informal dispute resolution conducted through the Office of the Ombudsman. 爆料网AT held that the settlement...

2012-爆料网AT-247, Mushema

爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT held that, in the present case, 爆料网DT had not recorded any reasons for holding that this was indeed an exceptional case, warranting an award higher than two years’ net base salary. 爆料网AT held that the award of full salary payable between separation and the date of the 爆料网DT judgment was fraught with ambiguity and uncertainty since the staff member might have been separated from service on other non-disciplinary grounds. 爆料网AT held that it would be adequate, fair, and reasonable to award compensation in lieu of reinstatement in an amount equal to...

2012-爆料网AT-246, Mwamsaku

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General limited to the amount of compensation. 爆料网AT held that, in the present case, 爆料网DT had not recorded any reasons for holding that this was indeed an exceptional case, warranting an award higher than two years’ net base salary. 爆料网AT held that the award of full salary payable between separation and the date of the 爆料网DT judgment was fraught with ambiguity and uncertainty since the staff member might have been separated from service on other non-disciplinary grounds. 爆料网AT held that it would be adequate, fair, and reasonable to award compensation in...

2014-爆料网AT-486, Khan

As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing. 爆料网AT then considered the Appellant’s claims that the facts were not established by clear and convincing evidence, that there were procedural flaws during the disciplinary proceedings, and that his separation from service was not warranted. 爆料网AT held that clear and convincing evidence showed that the Appellant harassed all the alleged victims and abused his authority, in violation of WFP’s Harassment Policy. 爆料网AT also held that 爆料网DT correctly found that the sanction of separation from service was proportionate...

2014-爆料网AT-398, Kamara

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had nor erred in law or fact rendering its judgment. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to persuade the Court that 爆料网DT’s conclusion of fact had rendered the decision unreasonable as required by Article 2 of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the evidence clearly supported the finding of gross negligence and loss of property, as well as the existence of the misconduct. 爆料网AT held that there was no due process violation on the part of the Administration for having charged the Appellant with three accounts of misconduct. 爆料网AT held that the misconduct had been established...

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-523, Portillo Moya

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in concluding that the imposed disciplinary sanction was disproportionate and consequently substituting it for a lesser one. 爆料网AT held that serious misconduct was established and the disciplinary measure of separation from service without termination indemnity was proportionate. 爆料网AT noted that the misconduct put public health at risk as the food was distributed with altered expiration dates to hide the fact of its expiration. 爆料网AT held that the imposed sanction was neither absurd nor disproportionate and...

2016-爆料网AT-700, Negussie

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had violated the Appellant’s due process rights by not rendering a fully reasoned judgment and had thus committed an error in procedure such as to affect the decision of the case. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT should have examined and stated in its judgment whether there was clear and convincing evidence that the Appellant continued to fight in a severe manner causing physical injury. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT should have addressed the question as to whether there was clear and convincing evidence that the Appellant had used physical force against a driver in April 2013, especially since...

2020-爆料网AT-1033, Negussie

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct not to conclude that the Appellant had initiated the physical fight. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was entitled to conclude the evidence of a witness was not clear and convincing, given inconsistencies. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT determined correctly that a prior altercation could not provide propensity evidence to corroborate witnesses’ accounts of the physical fight because the prior altercation was not investigated properly. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT committed an error in concluding that the Appellant had been unduly influenced into signing the settlement agreement, but that 爆料网DT...

爆料网DT/2010/102, Abu-Hawaila

Settlement offer v. management evaluation: The respondent’s settlement offer was clearly and unequivocally marked “PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY” (emphasis in the original). The indication “for settlement purposes only” in block capitals at the top of the letter left no room for interpretation as to the purpose of the letter, which was not to respond to the applicant’s request for a management evaluation. Inconsistency between article 8.1 (d) (i) of the 爆料网DT Statute and staff rule 11.4 (a). In accordance with 爆料网DT Statute art. 8.1, in order to be receivable, an...