±¬ÁÏÍø

1)Whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established: Transmission of pornographic images: Regardless of the Applicant¡¯s intent, the Tribunal found that it is established by clear and convincing evidence that he transmitted pornographic images (images of male genitalia) to and from his ±¬ÁÏÍø Women email account. Incidents involving Mr. SL: Considering the entire evidence, the Tribunal found Mr. SL¡¯s accounts credible which were corroborated by other evidence. It was established by clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant inappropriately touched Mr. SL and...

Was the decision to abolish the Applicant¡¯s post lawful? Given that the role of the Tribunal is not to decide whether the Administration chose the best course of action among those available to it and in the absence of evidence of illicit motive, the Tribunal finds that the decision to abolish the Applicant¡¯s post was lawful. The Tribunal finds that the Administration has given reasons for the non-renewal of the Applicant¡¯s contract and has shown that the decision was neither arbitrary nor improper. Did the Applicant have a right to ¡°return to work¡± at the completion of her maternity leave...

The Tribunal held that there was no breach of the applicable procedures in the selection process. The Administration acted in accordance with the ±¬ÁÏÍøIFIL guidelines for the selection of staff members. The Applicant was clearly given a full and fair consideration as demonstrated by the fact that she advanced through the process until the final stage. Accordingly, the application was dismissed.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct in its finding that the decision to terminate the Appellant¡¯s continuing appointment was unlawful as its purported basis (insufficient funds) did not exist. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it was not necessary for it to deal with the issue of whether ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in its finding that the Administration failed to comply with its obligation of retention. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the abolition of the post due to financial reasons did not subsist for judicial review. On the Secretary-General¡¯s argument that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had erred in finding Mr Nugroho...

The Secretary-General appealed the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment as it related to the non-renewal decision only. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that a shifting onus of proof was appropriate where the non-renewal decision was based on a lack of funds. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found nothing objectionable with the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s reference to the burden or onus of proof resting with the Secretary-General in the circumstances of the case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in concluding that the Secretary-General failed to establish by evidence that the financial situation of the ±¬ÁÏÍø body which had engaged Ms Loose at the time of the separation was still...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it was unable to detect any fault in the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s conclusion that the negative narrative comments and the performance appraisal itself constituted a reviewable administrative decision. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the negative narrative comments detracted from the overall satisfactory performance appraisal of the Appellant and had present and direct legal consequences for the Appellant¡¯s terms of appointment, thus the comments and the performance appraisal constituted a final administrative decision. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the application was...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the appeal was receivable on the basis that the Appellant was not challenging the new scheme for education grant introduced by the General Assembly, but rather the manner in which it was implemented in her specific case and the way in which the Secretary-General interpreted General Assembly Resolution 70/244. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in deciding that the Appellant did not have an acquired right to all of the previous education benefits she had enjoyed. On the question of the Appellant¡¯s access to a discretionary consideration of her claims on exceptional grounds, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Applicant failed to discharge his evidentiary burden to establish that his application was filed timeously. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the application was 8 days late and, as such, not receivable. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT judgment.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct to find that the application was not receivable. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by Mr Hamdan and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct to hold that Mr Hamdan¡¯s appointment was not terminated. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT should not have rescinded the decision placing him on SLWFP. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had correctly held that the SLWFP decision had been rendered moot because the employment relationship had ceased and the special leave had been consumed. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct to reject Hamdan¡¯s claim for compensation as there was no direct link between the SLWFP decision and the termination indemnity. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held...