爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and 爆料网AT, therefore, adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.
爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore 爆料网AT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.
爆料网AT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore 爆料网AT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments.
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in reopening a matter that had already been the subject of a final judgment of 爆料网AT. 爆料网AT considered that 爆料网DT exceeded its competence and erred in law by making its own determination of Mr Sarwar’s harassment complaint, emphasising that the role of the Tribunal is not to substitute its own decision for that of the Administration. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred when it rescinded the contested decision to close the matter underlying the Appellant’s formal complaint, and when it ruled that there was no need for a new...
The Appellant sought an order for reinstatement, an increase in the compensation awarded, and an increase in the amount awarded by 爆料网DT for moral damages. The Appellant also contested the failure 爆料网DT’s failure to make a referral for accountability to the Secretary-General under Article 10(8) of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT decided that Article 10(5)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute, which corresponds to Article 9 (1)(a) of the 爆料网AT Statute, does not confer on the Tribunal the power to enforce the reinstatement of a staff member’s contract in a non-renewal case. 爆料网AT, therefore, held that the Appellant’s...
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General’s submissions were valid in most aspects. 爆料网AT held that the award of 21 months’ compensation was excessive as it was not reasonable to assume that Ms Belkhabbaz’s fixed-term appointment would have been extended for longer than one year, finding that an award of 12 months’ remuneration would be adequate compensation. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT exceeded its competence and erred in law by awarding pecuniary damages relating to Applicant’s placement on sick leave with half pay. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred by awarding...
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred by excluding periods of temporary service from the calculation of consecutive service, as required by Staff Rule 3. 13(a)(iii). 爆料网AT upheld the appeal, vacated and modified the 爆料网DT judgment by rescinding the contested decision, and directed the Secretary-General to make a decision in accordance with former Staff Rule 3. 13(b) in relation to the Appellant’s application for mobility allowance.
爆料网AT noted that under the provisions of Staff Rule 1. 2(b), staff members must comply with local laws and honour their private legal obligations, including, but not limited to, the obligation to honour orders of competent courts. However, the ST/SGB/1999/4 legal framework has to be interpreted within the context of the authorizing Staff Rule 3. 18(c)(iii), which grants the Administration discretionary authority, as is reflected in the use of the word “may” in it, to make a proper and fair decision, in cases of indebtedness to third parties, under the proviso that a deduction for this purpose...
爆料网AT held that there was no evidence that the Secretary-General acted in an arbitrary, discriminatory, or irregular manner. 爆料网AT held that accounting for factors such as 爆料网AMID’s scorecard with respect to gender targets and the selected candidate’s proficiency in Arabic did not amount to discrimination and that it was in the Secretary-General’s discretion to do so. 爆料网AT held that no evidence had been presented to it by the Appellant to support the contention that his application was not given full and fair consideration. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant was unable to show through clear and...
Having decided that an oral hearing would not “assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case,” as required by Article 18(1) of the RoP, 爆料网AT denied the Applicants’ request for one. 爆料网AT also decided that the Appellants could not introduce additional evidence since that evidence had not been presented before 爆料网RWA DT and no application had been made to 爆料网AT to be allowed to submit that evidence on appeal. 爆料网AT noted that an appeal is not receivable where an Applicant bypassed the jurisdiction of the first instance Judge, by directly lodging an appeal with the Appeals Tribunal against...
