±¬ÁÏÍø

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly applied the judicial review tests under Article 2(1)(b) of its Statute. It found that the facts of misconduct were established by clear and convincing evidence, including direct testimony from refugees, corroborating documentary evidence, and hearsay, and that the former staff member had solicited bribes from refugees on multiple occasions between 2010 and 2019 in exchange for assistance with resettlement and other ±¬ÁÏÍøHCR services. It held that the established facts legally amounted to serious misconduct and that the sanction of dismissal was proportionate...

The Victim clearly had a motive not to tell the truth before the Tribunal. And she had an interest in the outcome of this case since continued payments fromthe Applicant depended on his continued employment with the United Nations in Congo. She even agreed that she was concerned about how she would survivewithout financial support from the Applicant. For all these reasons, the Tribunal did not find her testimony in court to be credible and relied instead on the statements she made before the Applicant¡¯s payments. A similar analysis applied to the Applicant¡¯s testimony. He too had an obvious...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the former staff member¡¯s challenge to the ALWP decision and the New York position decision was not receivable, as she had not sought management evaluation of those decisions.

Regarding the disciplinary measure, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT determined that her statements and social media posts constituted unauthorized outside activities amounting to misconduct. It noted that she issued statements, posted articles, and gave interviews without prior authorization, despite repeated warnings. It held that her social media engagements referenced international humanitarian assistance, humanitarian...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT determined that it had been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the former staff member committed serious misconduct by: i) failing to return to the United Nations Federal Credit Union (±¬ÁÏÍøFCU) funds of USD 587,428.65 that were erroneously credited to her account and to which she was not entitled; ii) failing to comply with a judgment issued by the High Court of Zambia (High Court Judgment), which ordered her to return the aforementioned funds to ±¬ÁÏÍøFCU; and iii) submitting false documentation and/or misrepresenting facts during the investigation conducted by the Office...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s claim regarding the calculation of Provident Fund benefits was unfounded because the Agency correctly applied the governing legal framework. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that, under Area Staff Rule 106.1(16)(D)(ii), the last published special interest rate applies up to and including the month immediately preceding payment. Since the payment was made in August 2022, the Agency properly applied PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022, which declared a negative special interest rate of -15.18% for January¨CJune...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in finding that the former staff member¡¯s performance had not been fairly and objectively evaluated. It found that she knew that her telecommuting arrangement was temporary and nevertheless reported to her duty station in Fiji only months later. It emphasized that her delay in requesting the payment of a travel lump sum and in applying for a visa for her mother did not excuse her failure to report timeously. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT confirmed that, in assessing her performance, the Administration was entitled to consider the extent of, reasons, and consequences of her...

The Tribunal found that Mr. Issa¡¯s application does not satisfy the stringent prerequisites for receivability under the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute, namely, that the decisive fact he now relies upon, that all ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA offices in the West Bank field were closed completely, was unknown to the Appeals Tribunal and to himself, prior to the Judgment. This was plainly known to Mr. Issa, rendering his application non-receivable on this ground alone.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that Mr. Issa does not present, or even purport to possess, evidence that he in fact had complied with ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA¡¯s directives to advise the Agency of his...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s claim regarding the calculation of Provident Fund benefits was unfounded because the Agency correctly applied the governing legal framework. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that, under Area Staff Rule 106.1(16)(D)(ii), the last published special interest rate applies up to and including the month immediately preceding payment. Since the payment was made in August 2022, the Agency properly applied PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022, which declared a negative special interest rate of -15.18% for January¨CJune...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT observed that there may have been some ambiguity in paragraph 104 of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Judgment for which the Secretary-General requested interpretation. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the appropriate interpretation was that when the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT renders its new decision on Article 10(5) and 10(6) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Statute, then the non-prevailing party may appeal the new ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment in its entirety, including the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s holding on the merits.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the Secretary-General¡¯s application for interpretation is admissible and granted. It further noted that once the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT fully exercises its jurisdiction on...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s application was not receivable ratione materiae because he did not attempt to resolve the dispute through the office of the United Nations Funds and Programmes Ombudsman, as explicitly required by the Settlement Agreement to which he had expressly agreed. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the terms of the Settlement Agreement remained binding and enforceable on the parties, and that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT committed no error in holding the parties to its terms.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT further found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err in determining that the...