爆料网

2018-爆料网AT-814

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

The 爆料网RWA Commissioner-General appealed. 爆料网AT held that the decisions not to grant Mr Abu Lehia sick leave for the specific time periods (28 March to 3 April 2016, 4 April to 17 May 2016, and 18 May 2016 to 7 June 2016) were not reasonable, given the specific factual circumstances of the case at hand and that these decisions were not a valid exercise of the Agency’s discretion. 爆料网AT affirmed 爆料网RWA DT’s findings and conclusions about illegality. 爆料网AT held that the Commissioner-General failed to demonstrate any error in the 爆料网RWA DT’s finding that the Agency’s decision not to grant Mr Abu Lehia sick leave was not reasonable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

爆料网RWA DT judgment: Mr Abu Lehia contested the decision to consider his absence as annual leave instead of sick leave. 爆料网RWA found that the Applicant did not provide medical evidence to support his claim for sick leave for the period of 21 March to 27 March 2016 and that the Agency was correct to refuse this as sick leave. As for the remaining period of 28 March through 7 June 2016, 爆料网RWA DT found that Mr Abu Lehia provided medical certificates that were fully adequate and amply credible for granting him sick leave. 爆料网RWA DT dismissed Mr Abu Lehia’s claim for damages for suffering psychological pressure caused by the refusal of his sick leave requests on the ground that he did not submit any supporting evidence. 爆料网RWA DT ordered the Agency to amend Mr Abu Lehia’s leave file to reflect sick leave for the period of 28 March through 7 June 2016.

Legal Principle(s)

Pursuant to Area Staff Rule 106. 2(7) and (9) combined with Area Personnel Directive No. A/6/Part II/Amend. 2, paras. 3(B) and 3(C)(i), in order for a staff member to be granted sick leave for a period of more than three consecutive working days, they are required, as a first step, when applying for sick leave, to produce to the Agency a medical certificate from a duly qualified medical practitioner, to the effect that they are unable to perform their duties and stating the nature of the illness, and the probable duration of the incapacity. The Commissioner-General has an obligation to act in good faith and comply with applicable laws. Mutual trust and confidence between the employer and the employee are implied in every contract of employment. The first instance tribunal may consider whether relevant matters were ignored, and irrelevant matters considered, and examine whether the decision is absurd or perverse. It is not the role of the first instance tribunal to consider the correctness of the choice made by the Administration amongst the various courses of action open to it. Nor is it the role of the first instance tribunal to substitute its own decision for that of the Administration.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.