爆料网

Reassignment or transfer

  • Discretion
  • Restructuring
    • Showing 21 - 30 of 139
    爆料网DT/2022/114, Banaj

    Scope of judicial review In a remanded case, such as the instant one, the Applicant may not expand the scope of claims for remedies contained in her original application and, as such, the Tribunal will not consider her new claims or arguments unless they are essentially related to her original claim in the application. Whether and to what extent the Applicant is entitled to remedies The Appeals Tribunal found in Banaj 2022-爆料网AT-1202 (see para. 1) that the temporary removal from the Applicant, and reassignment to others, of certain of her functions as Head of 爆料网ODC in Albania, was an unlawful...

    2022-爆料网AT-1251, Secretary-General

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that Ms. Caucci’s situation differed from the 爆料网DT Judgment in Tran Nguyen (爆料网DT/2015/002) and therefore it was erroneous for the 爆料网DT to apply such jurisprudence to find that Ms. Caucci had a general service lien with MINUSMA during and after her service with DPO. 爆料网AT held that the rights of staff members on secondment under the Inter-Organization Agreement concerning Transfer, Secondment or Loan of Staff among the Organizations applying the United Nations Common System of Salaries and Allowance, which was at issue in Tran Nguyen...

    2022-爆料网AT-1223, Cristina Silva

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Ms. Silva. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT committed several errors of law and fact and the decision to reassign Ms. Silva was without procedural flaws. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网AT’s jurisprudence does not establish a need for prior consultation for every reassignment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had an incorrect understanding of the contested administrative decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred when it held that the reassignment decision should have been notified in formal writing as it significantly altered Ms. Silva’s terms and conditions of...

    2019-爆料网AT-930, Chemingui

    As a preliminary issue, 爆料网AT held that the new evidence attached to the cross-appeal by the Respondent (the Appellant on Cross-Appeal and the Applicant before 爆料网DT) was not admissible. On the receivability of the cross-appeal, 爆料网AT held that it was not receivable since the Respondent was the prevailing party at the first instance level and he does not claim to broaden the order of 爆料网DT, but just to maintain it by means of an additional argument that has already been rejected by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in its judgment, although 爆料网AT differed in its reasoning. 爆料网AT held that the...

    2010-爆料网AT-076, Kasyanov

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General limited to the question of compensation. On the issue of the Secretary-General’s appeal being time-barred, as raised by Mr. Kasyanov, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s judgment on merits for the case was not a final judgment; while it made substantive findings, it left the issue of remedy to be resolved in the future. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT judgment on merits only became final when 爆料网DT issued the judgment on compensation. 爆料网AT held that, when the judgment on merits was appealed, a party could challenge the judgment on compensation and the judgment on...

    2011-爆料网AT-187, Allen

    爆料网AT held that the reassignment decision did not breach any rule, noting that, under Staff Regulation 1. 2(c), staff members are subject to the authority of the Secretary-General and to assignment by him or her to any of the activities or offices of the 爆料网. 爆料网AT held that the contested decision did not contravene ST/AI/2006/3/Rev. 1, ST/SGB/172 or ST/SGB/274. 爆料网AT held there was no error in the 爆料网DT’s decision to reject the Appellant’s argument that the Organisation failed to act in good faith in its dealings with him. 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

    2011-爆料网AT-178, Hepworth

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant was not given an opportunity to call witnesses at trial and prior to that was not able to discuss with his supervisor the reason for his transfer. 爆料网AT held that the appeal was receivable because 爆料网DT had committed an error in procedure, such as to affect the decision of the case when it limited the evidence. 爆料网AT held that due process required that a staff member must know the reasons for a decision so that he or she can act on it and the complainant was left in an unfair position in terms of attempts to resolve the dispute when deprived of the opportunity to...

    2011-爆料网AT-151, Kaddoura

    As a preliminary issue, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in declining to hear the proffered evidence from witnesses for the Appellant, as the testimonies related to facts that were not specifically in dispute and could not have refuted the uncontested fact that the decision had been confirmed. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to demonstrate that 爆料网DT erred in concluding that the confirmation decision was lawful and in awarding her compensation only in the amount of the Special Post Allowance she would have received. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err by failing to order the Appellant’s...

    2012-爆料网AT-266, Rees

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT affirmed 爆料网DT’s finding of the unlawfulness of reassignment decision. 爆料网AT recalled that reassignment is proper if the new post is at the staff member’s grade; if the responsibilities involved correspond to his or her level; if the new functions are commensurate with the staff member’s competencies and skills; and if he or she has substantial professional experience in the field. 爆料网AT held that, in Ms Rees’ case, none of these factors existed with respect to the position to which the Administration purported to reassign her. 爆料网AT held...