±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered Ms Das¡¯s application for Interpretation of judgment with respect to the award of interest on the compensatory damages and any remaining termination benefits and entitlements. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that its earlier jurisprudence held that interest was to be paid at the US Prime rate from the date on which the entitlement becomes due, which in this case is the date of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that it had merely affirmed the award of compensatory damages and termination benefits by ±¬ÁÏÍøDT and had not initiated it. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that there was no merit to the Secretary-General¡¯s claim that...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered Mr Gakumba¡¯s application for revision of judgment No. 2013-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-387. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it did not fulfil the statutory requirements and was seemingly disguised as an attempt to re-open the case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it would be manifestly unreasonable to submit that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDP Conversion Policy issued in 2010 could not be argued by the staff member in 2012 before the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT, or in 2013 before ±¬ÁÏÍøAT. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that no valid reason had been provided about the untimely submission of the application for revision. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the application for revision.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal of ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Order No. 233, which contended that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT exceeded its competence in issuing an order as there was no matter for adjudication after Ms Chocobar withdrew her application. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT, in making its Order in the absence of a case to adjudicate, lacked jurisdiction and exceeded its competence to a significant degree. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that Article 36 of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT RoP did not provide a legal basis for the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Order, as there was no case before ±¬ÁÏÍøDT to which Article 36 could apply. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT further noted that Article 36 does not allow ±¬ÁÏÍøDT to...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had correctly stated that even if it could be argued that the profile of the Broadcast Technology Officer (BTO P-4) post had changed due to the drafting of new Terms of Reference (TOR) by Ms Hermann, the only viable course of action in the circumstances for the purposes of filling it would have been a regular, competitive selection process and not a comparative review as happened in this case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct in finding that the so-called comparative review between Ms Hersh and Mr Tobgyal for the only post...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. As a preliminary matter, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed Ms Guzman¡¯s Motion to file an Addendum to Answer the Secretary-General¡¯s Appeal, after finding that the material she wished to submit was more properly suited for a hearing on the merits and was not germane to the issue being reviewed by ±¬ÁÏÍøAT. On the merits, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s conclusion that the contested decision was not affected by the exclusionary provision of Article 10(2) of its Statute and Article 14 of its Rules of Procedure was not supported by the contents of Ms Guzman¡¯s amended Motion of...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal and Mr Terragnolo¡¯s cross-appeal, noting that only the compensation awarded by ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was being contested. With respect to the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the specific remedy of allowing Mr Terragnolo to take the examination was not available and therefore, subsidiary compensation was the appropriate remedy to be ordered. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the impugned judgment followed ±¬ÁÏÍøAT¡¯s jurisprudence, but ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s estimation of the loss of chance was absurd or contrary to the evidence and particular circumstances of the case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that due...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred by concluding that ST/AI/2002/3 applied to ±¬ÁÏÍøICEF, as the ±¬ÁÏÍøICEF Handbook establishes the procedure that a staff member must follow should they wish to rebut the content of their performance report. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the principle articulated in Villamoran v. Secretary-General of the United Nations (2011-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-160), which holds that administrative issuances have greater legal authority over manuals such as the ±¬ÁÏÍøICEF Handbook, only where there is a conflict between guidelines and manuals and a properly promulgated...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal as to whether Ms Carrabregu was eligible to be considered for a permanent appointment. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the factual sequence clearly showed that Ms Carrabregu freely and willingly resigned from her service with ±¬ÁÏÍøDP to take up an appointment with a different entity (±¬ÁÏÍøV), thereby causing a break in service. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that this break in service should have led ±¬ÁÏÍøDT to uphold the administrative decision that Ms Carrabregu was not eligible for conversion to a permanent appointment. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT further noted that Ms Carrabregu¡¯s service to ±¬ÁÏÍøV could not be...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal of judgment No. ±¬ÁÏÍøDT/2013/145. On the issue of whether ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in law in not receiving the Appellant¡¯s application for revision of judgment, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it did. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that to import into Article 12(1) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Statute the limitations presently advocated by ±¬ÁÏÍøDT, merely because of the inclusion of the word ¡°executable,¡± would be unduly restrictive and tantamount to a denial of an already narrowly construed remedy and unduly circumscribe the right of access of staff members to ±¬ÁÏÍøDT. With respect to the merits of the application for revision, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that...

As a preliminary matter, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT denied the Appellant¡¯s request for an oral hearing. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT then considered the Appellant¡¯s claims that the facts were not established by clear and convincing evidence, that there were procedural flaws during the disciplinary proceedings, and that his separation from service was not warranted. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that clear and convincing evidence showed that the Appellant harassed all the alleged victims and abused his authority, in violation of WFP¡¯s Harassment Policy. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT also held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly found that the sanction of separation from service was proportionate...