爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing and considered his grounds of appeal. With respect to the claimed errors of procedure, 爆料网AT found no merit in the Appellant’s arguments. 爆料网AT was not persuaded that the Appellant suffered prejudice by 爆料网RWA DT admitting the Commissioner-General’s late reply, failing to translate the reply into Arabic, failing to lift the confidentiality order, or by failing to hold an oral hearing. However, 爆料网AT found that 爆料网RWA DT exceeded its jurisdiction in finding that the Appellant had an unhealthy working relationship with other colleagues. 爆料网AT upheld 爆料网RWA DT’s finding that the Appellant’s allegation of bias was not substantiated, yet it found that 爆料网RWA DT erred in law and made a manifest error of fact in determining that the transfer was free of infirmity. 爆料网AT found that the pre-judgment, concerning the Appellant’s future performance as a teacher, was a breach of his terms and conditions of employment sufficient, in and of itself, to merit an award of moral damages. Conversely, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not adduce evidence of financial loss before 爆料网RWA DT and dismissed his appeal in that regard. 爆料网AT upheld the appeal in part, vacated the 爆料网RWA DT judgment in part and awarded the Appellant compensation in the amount of three months’ net base salary.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the Commissioner-General’s decision to transfer him to another school. 爆料网RWA DT held that this decision was not a disciplinary measure, rather it was made in the interest of the agency. 爆料网RWA DT also held that the Applicant failed to prove his claim that he suffered stress or incurred financial expense as a result of his transfer such as would merit an award of compensation. 爆料网RWA DT dismissed the application.
Legal Principle(s)
Left deliberately blank