±¬ÁÏÍø

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the staff member¡¯s argument that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT applied the incorrect standard of proof is unsubstantiated, as the main facts of the case were undisputed by both parties. She had admitted having used ±¬ÁÏÍø Womens¡¯ UPS account to send two private shipments abroad, without mentioning any prior authorization. The aggravating and mitigating elements reviewed by the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT were by nature peripheral to the sanction imposed. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that even if it was not appropriate for the Administration to use a prior act of possible misconduct as an aggravating factor (as it was not previously...

The Tribunal found that the contested decision was lawful. The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to uphold a conduct befitting her status as senior international civil servant. The Applicant, as a senior manager, was conferred a duty of care to promote a ¡°harmonious work environment, free of intimidation, hostility, offence and any form of prohibited conduct¡± as per ST/SGB/2008/5, which she failed to do. The Applicant¡¯s actions, as established by the facts, constituted harassment and abuse of authority under ST/SGB/2008/5 and amounted to misconduct.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly pointed out that the only remedy requested by the staff member in his application to the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was the rescission of the administrative decision not to transfer him. Only now on appeal does the staff member raise other claims and additionally requests payment of all salaries and benefits from the date of termination to the date of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Judgment, including pension benefits and compensation for the material and moral harm inflicted on him, caused by harassment, mistreatment, and unlawful termination. His new requests on appeal cannot be accepted by the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT affirmed the decision of the ITLOS JAB, holding that the ITLOS was not obliged to conclude the recruitment exercise once it had begun, and that it had the authority to cancel the process. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was concerned by the change to the recruitment procedure during the course of the contested recruitment, but could not discern how this affected Mr. Savadogo¡¯s candidacy. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the ITLOS JAB that Mr. Savadogo¡¯s allegations of bias against the Registrar in the recruitment were countered by the fact that the President of ITLOS made the significant decisions in the recruitment...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in finding that the application was not receivable ratione personae and ratione materiae. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the refusal to investigate his complaint constituted an appealable administrative decision and the application was thus receivable ratione materiae. Furthermore, given that in this case the purported abuse was alleged to have been the improper rationale for the separation from service of Mr. Ross, as a former staff member, it was sufficiently connected to his employment to confer jurisdiction ratione personae. Turning...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found no errors in the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT Judgment and dismissed the appeal. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT correctly held that Mr. Neekhra¡¯s due process rights were not violated by an undue delay in the investigation proceedings; that Mr. Neekhra¡¯s actions to copy-paste excerpts from internal/external sources without proper citation was a violation of the Agency¡¯s regulatory framework and constituted misconduct; and that the disciplinary measures of a written censure and deferment of eligibility for consideration for promotion were proportionate to the offense. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT that the Administration had shown that Mr. Mirella¡¯s candidature was given full and fair consideration which satisfies the presumption of regularity, and that Mr. Mirella has not proven through clear and convincing evidence that he was denied a fair chance. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT reviewed Mr. Mirella¡¯s contention that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in finding that his exclusion from the shortlist was in compliance with Section 7.4 of ST/AI/2010/3 (Staff selection system). Specifically, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT evaluated Mr. Mirella¡¯s argument that the Hiring Manager erroneously found that he did not meet the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Dispute Tribunal correctly reasoned that under the ±¬ÁÏÍøFPA Disciplinary Framework, the assessment of the facts of misconduct is not exclusive to OAIS, but that the Director of the Department of Human Resources (Director/DHR) must also analyze the evidence, and such analysis could lead DHR to a different conclusion than that of OAIS. Accordingly, in this case, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøFPA Administration had the authority or locus standi to proceed with a disciplinary process even in the absence of a finding of misconduct by OAIS. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT further held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøFPA...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT upheld the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s conclusions that (1) four of the six incidents underlying the hostile work environment charge against the appellant were not established, but that two incidents were; and (2) appellant had unlawfully interfered with a recruitment exercise which also created a hostile work environment. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT rejected appellant¡¯s contention that because the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT considered that certain actions were not harassment, that they could not constitute misconduct. Whereas certain comments by the appellant about the gender composition of the senior management team, or a failure by appellant...

A a holder of an ±¬ÁÏÍø Volunteer offer of assignment, the Applicant may not file an application before the Tribunal, as he is neither a staff member or a former staff member of the United Nations, nor a person making claims in the name of an incapacitated or deceased staff member of the United Nations.

Secondly, there is no evidence that the Applicant submitted a timely management evaluation request.

As a result, the application is not receivable ratione personae and ratione materiae.