±¬ÁÏÍø

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that in this case, the JAB made not a decision, but rather a recommendation to the Registrar of the ITLOS, who in turn, purported to make the decision about Mr. Savadogo¡¯s appeal. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT recognized that the ITLOS changed and consolidated the relevant Staff Regulations and Rules so that the JAB now makes decisions (from which appeals may be brought to the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT) rather than, as occurred in this case, recommendations to the Registrar of the ITLOS, which the Registrar may or may not accept. However, this amendment came too late for the parties in this case. Thus, the original...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT did not commit an error in procedure, such as to affect the decision of the case pursuant to Article 2(1) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT rejected the argument that the fact that the Appellant did not receive the recordings of the hearing or transcript affected the decision of the case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant merely repeated arguments raised before ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT accepted ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT¡¯s finding that the Appellant had ample opportunity to respond to allegations and provide comments on the investigation report and exhibits. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT made fundamental errors of...

The Secretary-General appealed. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT allowed the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal and set aside the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s Judgment. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the correct way to make the comparison to ensure that the minimum increase in net base salary under Staff Rule 3.4(b) is achieved for the staff member is to compare both remunerations shorn of their COL and post adjustment elements and of Ms. Gonzalez Vasquez¡¯s assessments under each. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that although not perfect because of the potential variability of Ms. Gonzalez Vasquez¡¯s personal assessments under each, it achieves the required comparator using the GS net...

Mr. Okwir appealed. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly held that the OiC/OIOS had the authority to take the decision not to investigate Mr. Okwir¡¯s allegations. As Section 4.3 of ST/SGB/2019/2 provides that all subdelegations issued by the predecessor shall remain valid unless otherwise withdrawn or modified by the successor, the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT concluded that the mere fact that the new USG/OIOS began her term did not make subdelegations by the predecessor invalid. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT concluded that on 25 October 2019, both the ASG/OIOS and the newly appointed USG/OIOS were competent to make the decision. The new USG...

Mr. Branglidor appealed. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the totality of the evidence confirmed the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s conclusion that Mr. Branglidor was well aware of the untruthfulness of the forms when he submitted the second claim for the regular disbursement of the education grant. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was satisifed that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT was correct when it held that the act of misconduct was committed with knowledge and intent. Even though the misconduct did not lead to any actual prejudice, since the Administration recovered the payment made in advance and did not pay any further education grant, Mr. Branglidor¡¯s endeavor could have...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that ±¬ÁÏÍøDT did not err when it held that ST/AI/2017 was the governing legal framework applicable to the case. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that joint representation by ±¬ÁÏÍø-Women, where the Appellant currently served, and ±¬ÁÏÍøMIK, where the events in dispute occurred, was justified. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the circumstances also justified the granting of an opportunity to supplement the initial reply (and a corresponding right to reply). ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that, given that the Appellant had not contested the joint representation before ±¬ÁÏÍøDT at the time and having been afforded the opportunity to answer the supplementary...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Mr. Erg¨¹den¡¯s decision when he elected to be on the local-currency track was irreversible unless the pre-conditions as set out in Paragraph 31(b) and 38(e) of the PAS were met. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Mr. Erg¨¹den did not meet those pre-conditions and that, as the decision of the Standing Committee was in observance of these provisions, there was no basis to grant Mr. Erg¨¹den the right to revert to the USD track. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that there was no proper basis to compel the Chief Executive of Pension Administration to suspend Turkey from the two-track system. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal and...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant had no standing to seek consideration by a full bench. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that to the extent ±¬ÁÏÍøDT engaged in a fact-finding exercise of its own, this was not a legitimate exercise of its competence. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Administration¡¯s failure to provide adequate reasons for the contested decision resulted in the contested decision being unlawful. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Administration¡¯s failure to exercise its discretion with regard to carrying out an investigation also rendered the contested decision unlawful. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT allowed the appeal in part. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT vacated the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Judgment by...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT disagreed. First, the Tribunal reasoned that the JAB did not engage in a critical analysis of the facts of the case and did not apply the law to the facts in order to ascertain whether the exercise of discretion was lawful. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT concluded that the JAB Decision was arbitrary and did not meet the minimum requirements of providing a reasoned analysis. Second, on the merits, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found the Administration did not notify the staff member of his shortcomings in sufficient time. Neither did It provide the staff member with explicit measures against which his performance would be evaluated. Third...

Mr. Farhadi appealed. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed the appeal. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed Mr. Farhadi's request for compensation for the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT's delay in delivering its Judgment within a reasonable timeframe. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that Article 9(1)(b) of the Appeals Tribunal Statute authorises the Appeals Tribunal only to award compensation for harm deriving from an administrative decision, not from a delay in the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s proceedings. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT dismissed Mr. Farhadi's contention that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT shifted the burden of proof. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was satisfied that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had assessed all the elements of evidence in the record and correctly found that...