爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
In sum, considering the nature and gravity of the Applicant’s misconduct, as well as the past practice of the Organization in matters of comparable misconduct, the Tribunal finds that the imposed disciplinary and administrative measures were adequate in light of the Administration’s scope of discretion in this matter.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contests the decision to impose on her a disciplinary sanction of separation from service, with compensation in lieu of notice, and with termination indemnity.
Legal Principle(s)
The general standard of judicial review in disciplinary cases requires the Dispute Tribunal to ascertain: (a) whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established; (b) whether the established facts legally amount to misconduct; and (c) whether the disciplinary measure applied was proportionate to the offence (see, for example, Abu Hamda 2010- 爆料网AT-022, Haniya 2010-爆料网AT-024, Portillo Moya 2015-爆料网AT-523, Wishah 2015-爆料网AT537, Turkey 2019-爆料网AT-955, Ladu 2019-爆料网AT-956, Nyawa 2020-爆料网AT-1024). When termination is a possible outcome, misconduct must be established by clear and convincing evidence, which means that the truth of the facts asserted is highly probable (see, for instance, Molari 2011-爆料网AT-164, and Ibrahim 2017-爆料网AT-776).
Outcome
Outcome Extra Text
In the present case, the action was deliberate and fraudulent, and the staff member concealed the misconduct. Thus, the Tribunal finds that the Administration acted within the bounds of its discretion in finding that the Applicant’s misconduct was serious in nature. Her actions, submitting exam responses drafted by a third party to the Organization, falsely representing it was her own work, demonstrated a lack of integrity and disregard for the sanctity of the recruitment process. The Applicant’s actions further violated the relationship of trust necessary for a continued employment relationship.