爆料网

爆料网AT

Showing 571 - 580 of 1669
2010-爆料网AT-008, Onana

The Secretary-General appealed, asserting that 爆料网DT exceeded its competence in ordering suspension of the decision not to renew Mr Onana’s appointment until it determined the substantive application on its merits. 爆料网AT noted the exclusion of the right to appeal a decision to suspend the execution of an administrative decision constitutes an exception to the general principle of the right to appeal and must therefore be narrowly interpreted; this exception only applies to jurisdictional decisions ordering the suspension of an administrative decision pending a management evaluation. 爆料网AT...

2010-爆料网AT-009, James

爆料网AT considered Mr James’ appeal and the Secretary-General’s cross-appeal. 爆料网AT affirmed 爆料网DT’s finding that Mr James was not eligible for the P-3 position both because he did not take the required examination and because of the lack of required qualifications. 爆料网AT accordingly dismissed Mr James’ appeal that 爆料网DT erred in not awarding him compensation for loss of opportunity. 爆料网AT allowed the cross-appeal and set aside the order for compensation for distress. 爆料网AT noted that the compensation was not requested, there was no evidence of damage or injuries, and Mr James acknowledged on appeal...

2010-爆料网AT-036, Costa

爆料网AT held, noting that the Appellant relied on the 爆料网DT Rosca jurisprudence (judgment No. 爆料网DT/2009/052) in her request for 爆料网DT to waive the time limits for management evaluation, that the plain language of Article 8. 3 of the 爆料网DT Statute could not be disregarded. 爆料网AT approved judgment No. 爆料网DT/2009/051 as the law on this issue and disapproved the interpretation of 爆料网DT in Rosca. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

2010-爆料网AT-006, Hussein

爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s appeal and upheld 爆料网DT’s judgment. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant’s request that her challenge of the first recruitment process be placed in abeyance until completion of the second recruitment process was unusual and rightly declined by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that no right of the Appellant was infringed upon, as she had not been denied an opportunity to compete for the post in question. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed 爆料网DT’s judgment.

2010-爆料网AT-002, Parker

爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s appeal and found that 爆料网DT erred when it decided to give 爆料网HCR the option to either pay compensation in lieu of reinstating the Appellant or quash the contested administrative decision. 爆料网AT noted that Article 10. 5(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute was not applicable as the Appellant was serving under an indefinite appointment governed by Rule 104. 12(c) of the Staff Rules (100 Series). 爆料网AT expressed that the contested administrative decision did not concern his appointment, promotion, or termination but his placement between assignments. For this reason, Article 10.5(a)...

2010-爆料网AT-034, Muthuswami et al.

爆料网AT noted that the Appellants did not refer to any article of the Regulations that provides that the full retirement benefit may be restored after a participant opts to commute a portion of the retirement benefit into a lump sum. 爆料网AT held that the Appellants were bound by their decision to accept one-third of their pension as a lump sum and a reduced pension. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s decision could not simply be reversed. 爆料网AT rejected the argument that the Appellants had been discriminated against and that their basic fundamental rights concerning equity, fairness, and justice under...

2010-爆料网AT-004, Neville

爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s appeal and affirmed the decisions of 爆料网JSPB Standing Committee. 爆料网AT found that the Appellant’s first ground of appeal had no merit, noting that the Appellant had prior notice of her separation and could have exercised her right to restore her participation prior to the time of her separation in accordance with Section F. 1 of the Pension Fund’s Administrative Rules, which she failed to do. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网JSPF Standing Committee had no discretion to make an exception in this case and the Standing Committee’s decision not to restore the Appellant’s prior...

2010-爆料网AT-001, Campos

爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT findings that there was no flaw in the procedure used by the Staff Management Coordinating Committee to select the staff representative on the IJC. 爆料网AT also affirmed the 爆料网DT judgments rejecting the staff member’s allegations of conflict of interest on the part of the 爆料网DT judges. 爆料网AT further rejected the staff member’s request that 爆料网AT judges recuse themselves from the hearing of the appeal, noting the limited role of the IJC in the appointment of the 爆料网AT judges and the lack of any professional relationship between the person appointed as a staff representative and...