爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered the appeal of the Appellant and the cross-appeal of the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing, noting that it would not have added any further value or clarification of the factual and legal issues. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General's cross-appeal was receivable, according to Article 9(4) of the RoP. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in holding that the disciplinary investigation was flawed by procedural irregularities. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in finding that the disciplinary decision was unlawful and, accordingly, that there could neither be recission nor reinstatement. 爆料网AT held that given the kind and degree of misconduct, namely severe and repeated physical assault involving a sexual element, if not sexual assault, inflicted upon a former 爆料网V, separation from service lay within the discretion of the Secretary-General and was not disproportionate. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in awarding the Appellant compensation for material damages because there was no illegality under Article 10(5)(b) of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant was not entitled to compensation for moral damages because he did not request compensation for moral damages before the 爆料网DT or present evidence of alleged harm. 爆料网AT held that the impugned administrative decision was lawful. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal, upheld the cross-appeal, reversed the 爆料网DT judgment to the extent that it ordered rescission, in-lieu compensation, and compensation for material damages, and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment to the extent that it rejected the Appellant’s request for reinstatement.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of separation from service, asserting that he was denied due process. 爆料网DT held that the Applicant’s separation from service was unlawful because it occurred before the investigation was finalised. 爆料网DT noted that no exculpatory evidence had been taken into consideration. 爆料网DT ordered rescission of the decision to separate the Applicant from service, compensation in lieu of recession, and an award of material damages to the Applicant. 爆料网DT rejected the Applicant’s request for reinstatement because his appointment was set to expire just over a month later and there is no expectancy of renewal under a fixed-term appointment.
Legal Principle(s)
The matter of the degree of a sanction is usually reserved for the Administration, who has the discretion to impose the measure that it considers adequate to the circumstances of the case and to the conduct of the staff member. The general standard of judicial review in disciplinary cases requires the 爆料网DT to ascertain whether the facts on which a sanction is based have been established, whether the established facts qualify as misconduct, and whether the sanction is proportionate to the offense. When termination is a possible outcome, the misconduct must be established by clear and convincing evidence, which means that the truth of the facts asserted is highly probable.