爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that the contested decision had adverse effects on his terms and conditions of employment, in particular his health insurance and benefits. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had brought no relevant arguments to challenge 爆料网DT’s finding that there was no administrative decision within 爆料网DT’s jurisdiction being contested. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
爆料网AT considered Mr Al Sayyed’s appeal and found that the decision to terminate his service, effective from close of business 15 December 2007, and as communicated to him on 30 November 2007, was superseded by the action he took on 4 December 2007, an action reinforced by him on 7 January 2008. Under these circumstances, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA did not err in dismissing Mr Al Sayyed’s appeal against his termination on the basis that there was no termination decision capable of review. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal.
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General against judgment No. 爆料网DT/2012/159; an appeal by the “Applicant” (anonymity granted) against judgment No. 爆料网DT/2013/079; and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General of judgment No. 爆料网DT/2013/079. On receivability, 爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s case that 爆料网DT erred on the issue of receivability as the non-disciplinary issues contested by the Applicant were never submitted for management evaluation. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT, in deciding that the non-disciplinary issues had been submitted for management evaluation, erred in law and in fact...
爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网DT and its conclusion that the application was not receivable ratione materiae. 爆料网AT noted that a request for management evaluation must be submitted prior to bringing an application before 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT further noted that, even if the Management Evaluation Unit (MEU) had failed to resolve the Appellant’s complaints about the contested decision, she still had the opportunity to file a timely application with 爆料网DT for judicial review after she receive the response from the MEU but had chosen not to do so. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT exceeded its competence and jurisdiction in addressing...
爆料网AT considered an appeal by Ms Dzuverovic and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. On consideration of Ms Dzuverovic’s appeal, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not make an error of law in concluding that the application was not receivable ratione materiae, as the Appellant had failed to seek management evaluation of the contested decision and made no written request to extend the deadline. On consideration of the Secretary-General’s request in its cross-appeal to order the redaction of the paragraphs containing recommendations by 爆料网DT, 爆料网AT held that the approach of 爆料网DT did not merit the remedy...
Noting the broad discretion of 爆料网DT with respect to case management, 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the contention that 爆料网DT erred on a matter of procedure either by not affording the Appellant a second case management hearing or by not sanctioning the Secretary-General for his failure to submit documents. On the Appellant’s submission that 爆料网DT failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by not addressing his right to a current job classification and the closing of his “evaluative past, including the issue of his performance appraisal”, 爆料网AT noted that these matters had been...
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly determined that no appealable administrative decision was identified by the Appellant. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly assessed the actions and/or omissions against the definition of an administrative decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in law when it stated that the Administration’s proposed alternative did not qualify as a final decision, nor could it be considered as a decision not to proceed with the rebuttal process. 爆料网AT held that there was nothing in the Appellant’s written or oral submissions to persuade 爆料网AT that 爆料网DT made any error of law or fact in...
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that the reasons proffered by the Administration for not renewing Mr Pirnea’s appointment were valid, namely that he could no longer perform his functions in Somalia since his life was at risk there. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT’s conclusion that the Administration had hidden reasons for not renewing Mr Pirnea’s appointment was based solely on speculation and that 爆料网DT erred on a question of law and fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision when it concluded that there was no valid reason for the non-renewal. 爆料网AT noted that...
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that as the Secretary-General had clearly established the 爆料网DT’s lack of jurisdiction, 爆料网AT, therefore, made an exception to the general rule that only appeals against final decisions are receivable. 爆料网AT held that, as the issue of jurisdiction did not go directly to the merits of the case, there was a need to receive the appeal at that time rather than to wait for the issue to be raised in an appeal against the final judgment. 爆料网AT held that the appeal was receivable. On the merits, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s finding that there was one...
爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the appeal as 爆料网DT correctly concluded that applications to 爆料网DT were only receivable if the applicant had previously submitted the contested administrative decision for management evaluation and that management evaluation was a mandatory first step. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
