±¬ÁÏÍø

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the staff member.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that, in his appeal, the staff member failed to state the grounds of appeal, identify the defects of the impugned judgment and demonstrate on which grounds it was erroneous.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that, in reaching its conclusion, the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT found that the staff member admittedly did not submit a request for decision review. The ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT did not err when it found that the staff member¡¯s application was on that basis not receivable ratione materiae.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA/DT/2022/022.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT denied the Appellant¡¯s request for an oral hearing. It held that, pursuant to Article 18 of the Appeals Tribunal Rules of Procedure, an oral hearing would not be of any assistance in this case as the issue for consideration was straightforward and not complex.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the Appellant¡¯s attempt to broaden the scope of the issue for consideration was untenable. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT concluded that it was clearly agreed at the case management discussion (CMD) that the issue for determination was the desired reclassification of Mr. Menon's post from the P-4 to the P-5 level and that the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the staff member.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had reviewed the disciplinary decision thoroughly and methodically; the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had not erred in fact or law in conducting the proportionality analysis and there had been no irregularity in the investigation and disciplinary process, warranting intervention.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed that the obligation not to disclose internal information is not limited to confidential information. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that even if the staff member had liaison functions with member states, it did not give her the right to communicate internal...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the staff member.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that because of a combination of the staff member¡¯s failure to recall the events in question and of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s decision (concurred in by the parties) not to hold an in-person hearing, the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had appropriately referred to the investigation report.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was of the view that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had correctly determined the staff member¡¯s acts were sexual in nature. The staff member had, without invitation, encouragement or consent, embraced two different women in a sexual manner at a party at a staff retreat. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the...

After requesting additional findings of fact from the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT reconsidered an appeal by the staff member following the prior remand.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s judgment had failed to make a single mention of the nature, content or purpose of the testimony adduced under oath before it but was based entirely on hearsay evidence drawn exclusively from the investigation report and other documents. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found problematic the fact that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT made no pronouncement as to why it exclusively relied on hearsay evidence and gave no reason why the evidence was not given by the person...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT denied the Appellant¡¯s request for an oral hearing. It found that it would add nothing to his case presented in writing to hear from him in person and that an oral hearing would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposition of the case.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that much of the submissions advanced by the Appellant did amount to a resubmission of the case put to the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT but which it did not accept.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the WSSCC structure was closed down on 31 December 2020 at the instigation of its donors and replaced by another organisation (the Sanitation and Hygiene Fund). It...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by Mr. Loubani. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that while a preliminary assessment [regarding potential evidence by witnesses nominated by Mr. Loubani to be interviewed] should have been made by the investigators, this was done by ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT, and the evidence found to be so inadequate as to be safely ignored.

Mr. Loubani had an opportunity to present this evidence before ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT, so that its proper assessment meant that his due process right was allowed, albeit belatedly. It would have made no difference to the outcome had the investigators done so. The investigators would have reached...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the simple issue arising in this appeal was whether it was appropriate and correct for the judge to have proceeded with the application for review of the contested decisions while the motion for recusal was pending. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the straightforward answer is that it was not.

An application for recusal can be brought at any time in the proceedings and is usually a difficult strategic choice for the party making the challenge. Such an application is made, typically, at the moment the party loses confidence in the judge. Its timing will depend on the circumstances. The...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøJSPB decision.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT recalled that at the time of Mr. Arigon¡¯s entry into participation in 2002, Article 24 did not allow him the option to restore his prior contributory service because that option was limited to participants whose previous period of contributory service was less than five years and who had received a withdrawal settlement; neither of which applied to him. When the 2007 amendment to Article 24 was introduced, he had a one-year window, from 1 April 2007 to 1 April 2008, during which he could elect to restore his prior period of...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Mr. Saleh¡¯s complaints of procedural unfairness were unsustainable for the reasons stated by the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT and he had not discharged the burden incumbent upon him to satisfy the Appeals Tribunal that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Judgment was defective in that regard. He merely repeated the untenable submissions he made before the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT took note that Mr. Saleh admitted to two counts of fraud. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT then held that Mr. Saleh¡¯s conduct unquestionably damaged the trust relationship and the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct to defer to the reasonable conclusion of the Administration that the damage was irreparable and...