爆料网

2020-爆料网AT-1011

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网RWA DT did not exceed its competence when assessing whether the decision to convene a medical board was lawful. The decision to convene a Medical Board five months after the service-incurred-injury in order to examine his fitness for continued service was reasonable. 爆料网RWA DT erred in deciding that the decision to convene a medical board less than five months after the Appellant’s service-incurred injury was unlawful. 爆料网RWA DT erred in law and exceeded its competence by challenging the authority of the Medical Board’s conclusion without clear and convincing medical evidence, by placing significant value on the medical certificates submitted by the Appellant after his examination by the Medical Board and by deciding that the chances of recovery and resumption of duty could be considered to be 75 percent. 爆料网AT considered unlawful the conclusion of the 爆料网RWA DT that the termination on medical grounds was unreasonable. 爆料网AT granted 爆料网RWA’s appeal. 爆料网AT granted the Appellant’s appeal (in part), including reimbursement for translation costs.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested his termination on medical grounds. 爆料网RWA DT found that 爆料网RWA’s decision to convene a medical board less than five months after the Applicant’s service-incurred injury in order to evaluate his fitness for continued service was manifestly unreasonable, on the basis that 爆料网RWA had failed to give the staff member adequate recovery time and there was no evidence that he would never recover. 爆料网RWDT ordered rescission of the decision or payment of compensation in lieu.

Legal Principle(s)

The fundamental right of a staff member to full participation in the justice proceedings requires that he has an opportunity to receive a translation, not only of the reply of the respondent but also of the comments that the respondent could issue, especially if those comments contained rebuttal of the staff member’s allegations.

Outcome

Appeal granted; Appeal granted in part

Outcome Extra Text

Only financial compensation.

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.