爆料网

English

Showing 41 - 50 of 4321
2025-爆料网AT-1590, ABE

The 爆料网AT disagreed with the 爆料网DT’s finding that it was not clear that the issues raised by ABE were previously raised and resolved by a prior 爆料网DT case concerning ABE. The 爆料网AT considered it clear that the issues before the 爆料网DT had previously been decided by the Dispute Tribunal. The issue of alleged negligence in making medical referrals was therefore res judicata and should not have been considered again by the 爆料网DT in the case on appeal. The 爆料网AT thus agreed with the conclusion of the 爆料网DT that ABE’s application was not receivable, but it came to this conclusion for different reasons.

The...

2025-爆料网AT-1596, Maciej Fagasinski

The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT did not err when it relied on ST/AI/20100/4/Rev.1 (Administration of Temporary Appointments) in finding that the staff member’s performance evaluation was made in accordance with the procedural requirements in that Administrative Instruction. ST/AI/2021/4 (Performance Management and Development System) does not apply to Mr. Fagasinski’s performance evaluation, because the aforementioned Instruction explicitly states that it does not apply to temporary appointments.

The 爆料网AT found that the purpose of the performance evaluation was not to reexamine whether Mr...

2025-爆料网AT-1582, Olexandr Maruschak

The 爆料网AT observed that there may have been some ambiguity in paragraph 104 of the 爆料网AT Judgment for which the Secretary-General requested interpretation. The 爆料网AT held that the appropriate interpretation was that when the 爆料网DT renders its new decision on Article 10(5) and 10(6) of the 爆料网DT Statute, then the non-prevailing party may appeal the new 爆料网DT judgment in its entirety, including the 爆料网DT’s holding on the merits.

The 爆料网AT found that the Secretary-General’s application for interpretation is admissible and granted. It further noted that once the 爆料网DT fully exercises its jurisdiction on...

2024-爆料网AT-1503-Corr.1, Amjad Issa

The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT had appropriately concluded that Mr. Issa failed to submit a timely Request for Decision Review regarding the first of three months’ non-payment of his salary. However, the 爆料网AT held that, since each non-payment constitutes a separate administrative decision, Mr. Issa's Request for Decision Review regarding the second- and third-months’ non-payment was timely, rendering his application partially receivable.

The 爆料网AT further concluded however, that since Mr. Issa disregarded a directive circulated before his annual leave (when he was able to check his e-mail)...

2025-爆料网AT-1602, Hatim Mahmoud Sobier

The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in finding the staff member’s challenge to the non?installation of dependents receivable because the request for management evaluation was filed outside the mandatory 60?day deadline under Staff Rule 11.2(c). The 爆料网AT found that Article 8(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute prohibits waiving or suspending this deadline and that the 爆料网DT acted beyond its jurisdiction by deciding that the Administration had waived the timeliness argument.

The 爆料网AT further held that the 爆料网DT did not err in concluding that the denial of the optional reduced non?family service allowance was...

2025-爆料网AT-1599, Faten Hatem Al Dawoud

The 爆料网AT held that the appeal was timely, as Article 11(5) of the 爆料网RWA DT Statute provides that the filing period begins upon receipt of the Arabic translation of the judgment when the application was originally submitted in Arabic. Since Ms. Al Dawoud received the Arabic version on 9 January 2025 and filed her appeal on 10 March 2025, the appeal was timely.

On the merits, the 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网RWA DT correctly identified the Agency’s error in treating an email shared by Ms. Al Dawoud as confidential and acknowledged the harm caused by the erroneous disciplinary measure. However, the 爆料网AT...

2025-爆料网AT-1598, Ishtiaq Aslam

The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT correctly determined that the former staff member’s claims for compensation under Appendix D based on 爆料网AMID living conditions were not receivable because he had not exhausted mandatory medical review remedies. The 爆料网AT reaffirmed the principle that staff members must exhaust internal remedies before resorting to litigation.

The 爆料网AT further held that the 爆料网DT erred in reviewing the merits of the x?ray machine injury claim while a medical board review was pending. The 爆料网AT found that both elements of the Appendix D claim were premature and should have been declared...

2025-爆料网AT-1597, Janet Efrati

The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in dismissing both applications as not receivable. Regarding the first application, 爆料网AT found that the Settlement Agreement encompassed all disciplinary sanctions imposed on 9 December 2022, including the deferment of eligibility for salary increment. Therefore, the 爆料网DT was wrong to conclude that the deferment was outside the scope of the Agreement and that the Agreement had been fully implemented. The application for enforcement was properly receivable.

As to the second application, 爆料网AT held that the Administration’s interpretation of the Settlement...

2025-爆料网AT-1610, Ashok Kumar Nigam

The 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT did not err in concluding that the contested decision by the OAI to close the staff member’s complaint was lawful. The 爆料网AT found that the Administration acted reasonably in determining that the allegations lacked sufficient evidence to warrant an investigation and that the assessment process complied with 爆料网DP’s legal framework.

The 爆料网AT further held that the 爆料网DT correctly rejected the staff member’s procedural arguments, including claims of bias and denial of witness testimony. The 爆料网AT emphasized that the proposed witnesses could not have altered the established...