爆料网

Evidence of harm

  • Aggravating/mitigating factors
  • Burden of proof
  • Duty of mitigation
  • Evidence of harm
  • Exemplary/punitive damages (prohibition against award of)
  • In-lieu compensation
  • Loss of chance
  • Maximum amount / exceptional circumstances
  • Non-pecuniary (moral) damages
  • Pecuniary (material) damages
    • Showing 51 - 60 of 62
    2019-爆料网AT-899, Ashour

    On appeal, 爆料网AT limited its consideration to the issue of the amount of compensation awarded in lieu of rescission and the amount of compensation awarded for harm. On the issue of in lieu compensation, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to advance any error of law or of fact leading to a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT noted that in lieu compensation is not intended to compensate for the possible harm suffered by the injured person, as that is the specific aim of compensation for harm. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had the discretion to fix this amount as a generic sum and was not bound by...

    2020-爆料网AT-1052, Ahmad

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr Ahmad and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct to hold that Mr Ahmad’s appointment was not terminated. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT should not have rescinded the decision placing him on SLWFP. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly held that the SLWFP decision had been rendered moot because the employment relationship had ceased and the special leave had been consumed. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct to reject Mr Ahmad’s claim for compensation as there was no direct link between the SLWFP decision and the termination indemnity. 爆料网AT held...

    2021-爆料网AT-1122, Yasmina Laasri

    爆料网AT first noted that neither party disagreed with the 爆料网DT Judgment that the contested decision was unlawful. Regarding the Secretary-General’s appeal that an award in moral damages was not warranted, 爆料网AT disagreed with the Administration and found that the 爆料网DT was correct when it considered the medical certificate dated in March 2020, which gave a history of the staff member’s health in 2015 (a year before the contested decision). 爆料网AT found it credible that the staff member suffered from a pattern of harassment, which began before the time of the contested decision (June 2016). As such, a...

    2021-爆料网AT-1118, Boubacar Dieng

    爆料网AT first dismissed the cross-appeal, finding that although the Administration has the discretion to reassign staff members, such reassignment must be reasonable in the particular circumstances and cause no economic harm to the staff member. It must also respect the procedural and substantive rules of law and must not be arbitrary. 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT that the reassignment was performance-related and yet the staff member was never allowed the opportunity to address his performance issues prior to being reassigned. Regarding the appeal, 爆料网AT disagreed with the staff member that the 爆料网DT...

    爆料网DT/2009/066, Parker

    爆料网DT preliminarily held that only facts occurred from early 2005 to 7 November 2007 were to be taken into consideration with regard to the allegations of harassment leveled by the Applicant. Consequently, reported actions and decisions dating back to 2004, in particular the non-promotion of the Applicant in 2004, were excluded from the present Judgment. Regarding the remainder of the application, 爆料网DT held that the Applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate his allegations that he was subjected to harassment by the Organization and that the latter bore responsibility for...

    爆料网DT/2010/200, Alauddin

    The Tribunal will not order the Applicant’s reinstatement as were the original harm repaired, the Applicant’s appointment would already have ended. While the evidence before the Tribunal suggested that extensions of secondments beyond the five-year limit were possible under 爆料网DP policy, the Tribunal was not convinced that it was probable in this case. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the renewal would have been limited to the five-year restriction and compensation was warranted for that period, less the Applicant’s actual income. Account is taken of the context of the contractual breach i.e...

    爆料网DT/2016/219, Sarrouh

    The Tribunal granted the application in part and awarded the Applicant USD18,000 in moral damages: USD3,000 for each of the six RC position for which she applied in her August and November 2013 job applications (the appeal against other non-selection decisions was not found receivable as it had been made out of time). When assessing the Applicant’s relevant applications, it was unlawful for the EG to not nominate the Applicant as this decision was based on her 2012 performance appraisal report, which, at the given time, was still under rebuttal, and not on the last three performance appraisal...

    爆料网DT/2016/058, Haroun

    爆料网DT held that the conduct of the Acting Chief of Mission Support and the Applicant’s direct supervisor constituted an abuse of authority in their treatment of the Applicant. Given the gross injustice meted out to the Applicant by her managers, 爆料网DT awarded her compensation representing twelve months' net base salary. 爆料网DT awarded the Applicant three months’ net base salary as moral damages. 爆料网DT awarded the Applicant USD5,000 for the unfair treatment at the hands of her managers. 爆料网DT noted that the two managers literally destroyed the Applicant’s career and made decisions in clear breach of...