爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that, while it may be argued that the Appellant did not request her transfer to Amman, she consented to it, and the transfer was effected for her personal convenience. 爆料网AT held that the text of 爆料网RWA Area Staff Rule 107. 9 was clear and that 爆料网RWA DT correctly concluded that she was not entitled to the payment which she sought. 爆料网AT held that, contrary to the Appellant’s submissions, 爆料网RWA DT did not exclude her evidence. Recalling the broad discretion of 爆料网RWA DT to ascertain the weight to attach to the evidence before it, 爆料网AT noted that 爆料网RWA found that the Appellant’s evidence did not demonstrate, in and of itself, that the Appellant had a right to payment of the entitlements. 爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网RWA DT’s finding that the Appellant had not demonstrated how the circumstances or conditions of employment of other staff members were relevant to her situation and 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not err in this regard. 爆料网RWA DT found no error of law or error of fact, manifest or otherwise, on the part of 爆料网RWA DT. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT correctly found that the Appellant’s claims for payment of outstanding travel subsistence allowance (TSA) as well as the additional issues she raised had not been the subject of decision review and thus were not receivable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested, inter alia, the decision not to pay her entitlements upon her change of duty station, her exclusion from the short-list for three posts and alleged abuse of power by human resources. 爆料网DT dismissed the application.
Legal Principle(s)
An appealable decision is one that has a direct impact and produces direct legal consequences on a staff member, affecting his or her terms of appointment or contract of employment.