±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the appeal by the Secretary-General challenging the amount of the award of compensation for moral damages. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the award of moral damages was supported by the evidence before ±¬ÁÏÍøDT and that the amount was not excessive based on that evidence. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT rejected the Secretary-General¡¯s argument that the award in the present case should be compared with awards in similar non-renewal cases. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had not committed any error in its assessment of the award of moral damages and that the Secretary-General had not established any ground which would justify ±¬ÁÏÍøAT¡¯s...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellants had failed to present any evidence showing that they had suffered mental distress during the investigation, and such evidence was necessary for an award of moral damages. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that there was no merit in the Appellant¡¯s claim that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT had erred in not awarding them compensation for the lengthy administrative delay during the investigation. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT judgment.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate evidence of exceptional circumstances to justify the need to submit new evidence or file additional pleadings and, therefore, dismissed the Appellant¡¯s motion. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT rejected the request for an oral hearing finding that it would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT was not required to set out its findings on every submission presented by the Appellant and the failure to do so did not amount to an error on the part of the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT upheld the order of ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT to rescind the contested...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the appeal by the Secretary-General challenging the compensation for moral damages. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that there was enough evidence produced that the amount of compensation for moral damages had been paid into the staff member¡¯s bank account. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the payment of the compensation constituted an acceptance of the Secretary-General of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the appeal was, therefore, moot. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT rejected the staff member¡¯s claim for costs against the Secretary-General because of abuse of process. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that although the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal had no merit, it...

On the decision to postpone the separation on medical grounds, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that a staff member had a right to be compensated for a service-incurred injury. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT erred in law in determining the decision to postpone the Appellant¡¯s separation on medical grounds until the end of the disciplinary process was lawful. Noting that the Appellant did not provide any evidence in support of his claim of psychological suffering (or harm), ±¬ÁÏÍøAT did not award moral compensation. On the issue of the SLWOP, given the nature and seriousness of the allegations against the Appellant, ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the staff member and an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT upheld both ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s finding that the decision to close the investigation was improper as well as ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s refusal to order rescission of that decision on account of the subject of the investigation having separated from the Organisation. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT, however, vacated ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s moral damages award on the grounds that the staff member did not present any evidence, apart from his own unsworn testimony to support the claim. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ¡°generally speaking, the testimony of an applicant alone without corroboration by...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an application to ±¬ÁÏÍøAT contesting the Conciliation Committee¡¯s decision to recommend compensation of USD 35,000. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the motion of Ms Cohen seeking reconsideration of a ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Order granting the ICJ Registrar additional time to file his answer. On Ms Cohen¡¯s application for permission to reply to the ICJ Registrar¡¯s answer on the grounds that neither the ICJ Registrar nor the Conciliation Committee addressed the testimony on record in their decisions, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered that exceptional circumstances existed and granted the motion. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that, absent a successful...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal by a full bench of ±¬ÁÏÍøAT. The majority of the judges upheld ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s findings that the contested decisions were substantively and procedurally flawed and dismissed the appeal. As for ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s moral damages award, the majority noted that the purpose of the amendment to Article 10. 5(b) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Statute, made following General Assembly Resolution 69/203, was to introduce an express requirement that compensation for harm can be awarded only when there is a sufficient evidentiary basis. The majority held that evidence of moral injury consisting...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Secretary-General¡¯s submissions were valid in most aspects. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT 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. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT exceeded its competence and erred in law by awarding pecuniary damages relating to Applicant¡¯s placement on sick leave with half pay. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred by awarding...

The Appellant sought an order for reinstatement, an increase in the compensation awarded, and an increase in the amount awarded by ±¬ÁÏÍøDT for moral damages. The Appellant also contested the failure ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s failure to make a referral for accountability to the Secretary-General under Article 10(8) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Statute. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT decided that Article 10(5)(a) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Statute, which corresponds to Article 9 (1)(a) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute, does not confer on the Tribunal the power to enforce the reinstatement of a staff member¡¯s contract in a non-renewal case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT, therefore, held that the Appellant¡¯s...