±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT had before it three decisions of the Conciliation Committee: the first regarding the establishment of two inquiry panels, Panel One and Panel Two; the second in respect of the decision to place the Appellant on administrative leave with pay, and the third concerning the decision to separate her from service. As a preliminary matter, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT did not admit to the case file two motions submitted by the Appellant subsequent to the issuance of judgment No. 2015-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-531, as ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the documents that she sought to adduce would not assist ±¬ÁÏÍøAT with its consideration on the merits. By way of...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. With respect to the application of Section 1. 8(d) of ST/AI/1999/9 to Ms Xie, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT clarified that the requirement, that the Hiring Manager must submit a written analysis indicating how the qualifications and experience of the recommended candidate are ¡°clearly¡± superior to those of female candidates who were not recommended, refers to the final stage of the selection process, i. e. it is when making his or her final recommendation for the selection of a male candidate over a female candidate, to the head of department/office, authorized to...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Commissioner-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT set out the correct legal framework, but thereafter erroneously reviewed the evidence and interfered with the administrative discretion, since ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA had established the misconduct by clear and convincing evidence. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT erred in law in its evaluation of the evidence and that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA had established the existence of the facts warranting disciplinary sanction. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the procedure and the subsequent decision were lawful and there was no basis to rescind the termination or to award any...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in unilaterally establishing new starting points for the time to run for the purpose of filing claims with the ABCC that were contrary to the express text of Article 12 of Appendix D to the Staff Rules. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that this was a case where the staff member failed to appreciate the filing deadlines. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ignorance of the law was no excuse for missing deadlines. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it was open to the ABCC to find that the Appellant¡¯s explanation for her delay did not constitute exceptional circumstances justifying the waiving of the four-month time limit prescribed...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered appeals by both Mr Aliko and the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly concluded that Mr Aliko¡¯s application contesting the decision refusing his request to change nationality for ±¬ÁÏÍø purposes was time-barred. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in rejecting as not receivable Mr Aliko¡¯s claims against the decisions on his ineligibility for education grant and on education grant recovery. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it was lawful for the Administration to use Mr Aliko¡¯s pending entitlements to recover part of his indebtedness to the Organisation. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in concluding...

On the basis that the Appellant did not raise claims under the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute, reargued the claims he presented to ±¬ÁÏÍøDT and failed to explain how ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in deciding his claims, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not make any errors of law or fact in denying the Appellant¡¯s application and concluding that the selection process was correctly followed, the candidate was fully and fairly considered and there was no bias or procedural flaw. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT properly refused to address the Appellant¡¯s various claims of harassment on the ground that he failed to establish proof...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in law in concluding that the imposed disciplinary sanction was disproportionate and consequently substituting it for a lesser one. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that serious misconduct was established and the disciplinary measure of separation from service without termination indemnity was proportionate. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the misconduct put public health at risk as the food was distributed with altered expiration dates to hide the fact of its expiration. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the imposed sanction was neither absurd nor disproportionate and...

As a preliminary matter, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT denied the Appellant¡¯s application to file a reply to the Secretary-General¡¯s answer and her motion to file additional evidence. On the issue of redaction, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant¡¯s concerns were unfounded because the judgments referenced her professional profile only in a general way and did not detail the confidential matters raised by the Appellant in her submission. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the findings of ±¬ÁÏÍøDT that the previous judgment with the Appellant¡¯s name as written had already been in the public domain for a long time and no useful purpose would be...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered both an appeal by Ms Flores requesting an increase in compensation and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in either determining that there were procedural violations that warranted rescission of the separation decision or in its determination that Ms Flores was not entitled to reinstatement (justifying a material award) as her contract was due to expire shortly after receipt of the dismissal letter. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that Ms Flores was not informed prior to the interview what the allegations were. Noting that the records indicated that Ms Flores...

On the Appellants¡¯ request for an oral hearing, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case since the sole issue on appeal was an issue of law (receivability). On the Appellants¡¯ request that the appeal be heard by a full bench, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that neither the President nor any two judges sitting on the appeal found the case raised a significant question of law warranting a full bench and denied the request. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that: ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was competent to review its own competence or jurisdiction; ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly applied the jurisprudence of ±¬ÁÏÍøAT in the definition of...