爆料网

Evidence

  • Admissibility
  • Anonymous statements
  • Audio-recordings
  • Compensation
  • Corroboration/hearsay
  • Credibility assessment
  • Evidence of harm
  • Medical evidence
  • Production of evidence
  • Sole testimony of complainant
    • Showing 1 - 10 of 138
    2026-爆料网AT-1617, ABF

    The 爆料网AT held that the issues on appeal were whether the 爆料网DT had clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence in issuing the impugned interlocutory case?management orders, and whether any alleged procedural errors were effectively irremediable by a final judgment or manifestly unreasonable so as to justify interlocutory review. It recalled that appeals against interlocutory orders are receivable only in rare and exceptional circumstances, and that matters relating to evidence, procedure, and trial conduct fall within the 爆料网DT’s broad case?management discretion.

    The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT...

    2026-爆料网AT-1621, Yaser Abu Zeid

    The 爆料网AT held that the issues on appeal were whether the 爆料网RWA Dispute Tribunal erred in finding that the facts of misconduct were established to the clear and convincing evidence standard, whether it erred in concluding that the conduct constituted serious misconduct, and whether it erred in affirming the proportionality of the disciplinary sanction of separation from service without termination indemnity. It recalled that its role is not to conduct a de novo review, but to determine whether the first?instance tribunal committed an error of law, fact, or procedure resulting in an unreasonable...

    2026-爆料网AT-1616, ABL

    The 爆料网AT held that the former staff member committed sexual harassment towards the Complainant by: i) entering her accommodation without invitation, hugging, kissing, and licking her forehead without her consent, reclining her on her bed to lie next to him, and refusing to leave when asked; and ii) telling her the following day that she had been unable to sleep because she had been thinking of him.

    The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT had provided a clear and reasoned analysis of the witnesses’ credibility.It concluded that the 爆料网DT’s determination that certain discrepancies in the Complainant’s...

    2024-爆料网AT-1494, Zafarkhon Sheralov

    The 爆料网AT first considered the staff member’s request for an oral hearing, and decided it was not necessary for the expeditious and fair disposal of his case.

    The 爆料网AT observed that when the only persons present in a physical assault are the perpetrator and the victim, an oral hearing may be useful for reaching credibility findings. However, in this case, the 爆料网AT noted that the staff member and his counsel agreed that they had no witnesses to present at an oral hearing and preferred to rely on the investigation report. In these circumstances, the 爆料网DT did not err in not holding an oral hearing...

    2025-爆料网AT-1592, Deogracious Bwire Adundo

    The 爆料网AT held that the staff member’s claims of fraudulent manipulation of his electronic leave records failed for want of proof.

    The 爆料网AT further held that the 爆料网DT erred by leaving crucial factual issues unresolved, which made it impossible to determine the appeal fully. The 爆料网AT found that the tables summarizing the staff member’s sick leave records were not hearsay but qualified as business records entitled to a presumption of accuracy unless rebutted. However, the 爆料网AT was not satisfied that these records were accurate and noted unresolved inconsistencies. Accordingly, the 爆料网AT further...

    2025-爆料网AT-1599, Faten Hatem Al Dawoud

    The 爆料网AT held that the appeal was timely, as Article 11(5) of the 爆料网RWA DT Statute provides that the filing period begins upon receipt of the Arabic translation of the judgment when the application was originally submitted in Arabic. Since Ms. Al Dawoud received the Arabic version on 9 January 2025 and filed her appeal on 10 March 2025, the appeal was timely.

    On the merits, the 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网RWA DT correctly identified the Agency’s error in treating an email shared by Ms. Al Dawoud as confidential and acknowledged the harm caused by the erroneous disciplinary measure. However, the 爆料网AT...

    2025-爆料网AT-1607, John Zumbu Massamba

    The 爆料网AT held that the former staff member filed his appeal within the statutory deadline.It noted that since he filed his application before the 爆料网DT in French, the 60-day time limit for filing his appeal ran from the date of receipt of the 爆料网DT Judgment in that same language.As he received the 爆料网DT Judgment in French on 15 January 2025 and filed his appeal on 20 February 2025, the 爆料网AT held that it was filed timely.

    Nevertheless, the 爆料网AT found that the former staff member’s application before the 爆料网DT was not receivable ratione temporis.The 爆料网AT observed that the former staff member...

    2025-爆料网AT-1534-Corr.1, Dionette Pino Genayas

    The 爆料网AT noted that months after the death of the participant in the Fund, the Appellant had produced Pens.A/2 forms purporting to change the designation of the beneficiary of the residual settlement, executed by a thumbprint and not the participant’s signature. The 爆料网AT also noted the medical evidence of signs of the participant’s dementia.

    The 爆料网AT found that the Appellant had provided no evidence to support the contention that the participant’s mental capacity had improved by the time of thumbprinting the later forms. The 爆料网AT held that the Fund had not erred when it found those forms...

    2024-爆料网AT-1494-Corr.1, Zafarkhon Sheralov

    The 爆料网AT first considered the staff member’s request for an oral hearing, and decided it was not necessary for the expeditious and fair disposal of his case.

    The 爆料网AT observed that when the only persons present in a physical assault are the perpetrator and the victim, an oral hearing may be useful for reaching credibility findings. However, in this case, the 爆料网AT noted that the staff member and his counsel agreed that they had no witnesses to present at an oral hearing and preferred to rely on the investigation report. In these circumstances, the 爆料网DT did not err in not holding an oral hearing...

    2024-爆料网AT-1427-Corr.1, AAS

    The 爆料网AT held that the Inspector General’s Office (IGO) and the Administration failed to properly consider relevant factors brought to their attention during the investigation into the staff member's misconduct. Specifically, they did not considerate the medical context in which the established misconduct occurred, which could have been exculpatory for the staff member. The 爆料网AT found that they failed to investigate and appreciate the potential effects of the staff member's brain tumour and/or treatment on certain aspects of his interpersonal relations with other staff members.

    The 爆料网AT held...