爆料网

2019-爆料网AT-905

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT rejected the 爆料网RWA Commissioner-General's submission that the appeal was defective because it failed to identify any of the grounds of appeal prescribed by Article 2(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s ground of appeal was without merit. 爆料网AT held that the Commissioner-General was obliged to calculate the Appellant’s retirement benefits in accordance with the new Staff Rule and did so correctly. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not commit any error of fact and law in arriving at its decision. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to calculate her retirement benefits according to the Occupational Health Salary Scale. 爆料网RWA DT found that 爆料网RWA correctly applied the rules applicable at the material time of her recruitment. 爆料网RWA DT further held that it was not entitled to examine the 爆料网RWA Commissioner-General’s authority in issuing Regulations and Rules and that the only way for an applicant to successfully challenge a 爆料网RWA regulation or rule was to establish that the rule was in conflict with a higher principle established by the 爆料网. 爆料网RWA dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

In the interests of justice, it is appropriate for 爆料网AT to make allowances for the fact that a staff member is not legally represented in its assessment of whether he or she has properly identified any grounds of appeal.

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Ghusoub
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
President Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type