爆料网

爆料网AT

Showing 1491 - 1500 of 1669
2020-爆料网AT-1037, Yabowork

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s language, which was strongly critical of the Appellant, was unwarranted. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in finding that the decision to discontinue the payment of her SPA was a legitimate exercise of the Administration’s discretion, as the Appellant no longer met the requirements for it. 爆料网AT held that the discontinuation of the SPA was justified in view of the Administration’s obligation and right to correct such an erroneous situation. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

2020-爆料网AT-1047, Orabi

爆料网AT considered an appeal of judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2019/070 by the Commissioner-General of 爆料网RWA. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not commit any error when it concluded that 爆料网RWA had failed to consider the Applicant’s personal and humanitarian reasons in the impugned decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT correctly concluded that relevant matters (personal and humanitarian reasons) had been ignored in the exercise of the Commissioner-General’s discretion. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.

2020-爆料网AT-1048, Ross

The Applicant sought revision of judgment 2019-爆料网AT-944 pursuant to Article 11(1), which sets out strict and exceptional criteria that must be met. The Applicant alleged he became aware, in January 2020, that the Inspector General’s Office (IGO) of 爆料网HCR had not made a finding on whether the hiring manager’s conduct amounted to misconduct. The Applicant contended that the Respondent had made misleading comments to 爆料网AT, which led the latter to erroneously conclude that the IGO had investigated and determined that no misconduct had occurred. In addition, the Applicant sought leave to submit...

2020-爆料网AT-1057, Nsengiyumva

On the Appellant’s claim that the 爆料网DT Judge was biased, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s specific allegations were not made out and any missteps in the conduct of the hearing did not warrant interference with the result. On the Appellant’s claim that his supervisor harassed him to the extent that his actions were mitigated substantially, 爆料网AT held that even if the Appellant established that there was a dysfunctional relationship between him and his supervisor, this could not have had the effect of mitigating his actions significantly, such were the scale and duration of his misconduct. 爆料网AT...

2020-爆料网AT-1058, Nadeau

爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr Nadeau of Order No. 184 and his request that both Order Nos. 184 and 169 be rescinded. 爆料网AT held that he did not demonstrate that 爆料网DT had clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence in rejecting his request for new documents to be introduced into evidence. 爆料网AT noted that the issue could be raised on appeal against the final judgment on the merits. 爆料网AT is competent to review whether certain facts remained unresolved at the 爆料网DT level and to consider the need for factual determinations based on the whole of the relevant evidence. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal.

2020-爆料网AT-1059, Bezziccheri

爆料网AT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2019-爆料网AT-948 by Ms Bezziccheri. 爆料网AT considered Ms Bezziccheri’s claim that ST/AI/2019/1 was unknown to her and 爆料网AT at the time the judgment was issued. Noting the three elements that an applicant for revision must establish cumulatively before a final judgment of 爆料网AT can be revised, 爆料网AT held that the fact that ST/AI/2019/1 was known to 爆料网AT when it issued its judgment (as it had been referred to therein) was sufficient in and of itself to fail the cumulative test. Further, 爆料网AT noted that ST/AI/2019/1 was not determinative of Ms...

2020-爆料网AT-1013, Belsito

A telephone conversation that was suggestive of gender discrimination in the decision-making process and was raised by the Appellant in his application was ignored by 爆料网DT. 爆料网DT made an error in the procedure by failing to hold an oral hearing where witnesses could testify about that conversation. 爆料网AT remanded the matter back to a different judge of the 爆料网DT for the production of further evidence, additional findings of fact, and the issuance of a new judgment.

2020-爆料网AT-1014, Chhikara

爆料网AT held that the reason upon which 爆料网DT decided not to rescind the contested decision, i. e. the lapse of time, was insufficient justification. 爆料网AT held that, given the grossly negligent illegalities in which the selection process was conducted as found by 爆料网DT, rescission of the contested decision was mandatory and could not be avoided on the basis of the excessive length of time between the filing of the application and the 爆料网DT judgment. 爆料网AT held that allowing the decision not to select the Appellant to remain in effect as if it was correct, despite its clear illegality, was not...

2020-爆料网AT-1015, Handy

爆料网AT held that there was no express rescission of the impugned decision by the Administration. 爆料网AT held that monthly renewals pending the outcome of the rebuttal of a performance evaluation did not resolve the complaint of the non-renewal of the fixed-term appointment. 爆料网AT held that the monthly renewals did not rescind or supersede the impugned decision and the application could not be considered moot. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in its decision, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT upheld the appeal, vacated the 爆料网DT judgment, and remanded the matter to 爆料网DT for proper...

2020-爆料网AT-1018, Abu Ouda et al

爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT exercised its discretion lawfully to consolidate the cases. 爆料网AT held that the impugned decisions were taken in good faith and on a reasonable basis. 爆料网AT held that there was a bona fide reason to restructure and that it was operationally rational not to renew the Limited Duration Contracts at the time. 爆料网AT held that the Appellants' argument with regard to their acquired rights being violated was without merit. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.