Search
2016-爆料网AT-678, Khalaf
爆料网AT preliminarily denied the request for an oral argument and then considered the merits of the appeal. 爆料网AT found that the requirements of Article 2(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute were not fulfilled in the Appellant’s case as 爆料网DT did not commit an error of fact, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT noted that the evidence showed that the Administration was involved in a process of revision of activities in Iraq, rationalizing of staff, realignment of functions, and reduction of budget. These administrative activities led to the redeployment of the post encumbered by the Appellant...
2016-爆料网AT-680, James
爆料网AT considered the appeal and noted that an application for revision of judgment is only receivable if it fulfils the strict and exceptional criteria established under Article 11 of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT found that the Appellant sought a review because he disagreed with the Appeals Tribunal’s analysis of his claims and he did not fulfil the criteria set out in Article 11 of the 爆料网AT Statute, and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
2016-爆料网AT-681, Karseboom
爆料网AT considered Mr Karseboom’s application for interpretation of judgment regarding 爆料网AT’s judgment delivered on 30 October 2015, with respect to: (i) whether moral damages awarded by the 爆料网DT were still payable; and (ii) whether the Appeals Tribunal required a medical board to be convened. 爆料网AT found that Mr Karseboom failed to identify any sentences or words in the judgment that were unclear or ambiguous. 爆料网AT accordingly dismissed the application for interpretation of judgment.
2016-爆料网AT-682, Marcussen et al.
爆料网AT considered the appeals of both the Secretary-General and Mancussen et al. 爆料网AT upheld 爆料网DT’s determination that the Assistant Secretary-General for Office of Human Resources Management did not give meaningful individual consideration to the staff members’ requests for conversion to permanent appointments and noted that 爆料网AT gave a clear directive to the Administration that, upon remand, it should consider the staff members’ suitability for conversion to permanent appointments “by reference to the relevant circumstances as they stood at the time of the first impugned refusal to convert...
2016-爆料网AT-683, Featherstonet al.
爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT upheld 爆料网DT’s determination and noted that it gave a clear directive to the Administration that, upon remand, it should consider staff member’s suitability for conversion to a permanent appointment “by reference to the relevant circumstances as they stood at the time of the first impugned refusal to convert her appointment” and that the Administration failed to comply with the said directive. 爆料网AT also agreed with 爆料网DT that the Assistant Secretary-General for Office of Human Resources Management failed to give any consideration whatsoever to...
2016-爆料网AT-684, Ademagic et al.
爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal and Ademagic’s cross-appeal. 爆料网AT upheld 爆料网DT’s determination that the Assistant Secretary-General for Office of Human Resources Management did not give meaningful individual consideration to the staff members’ requests for conversion to permanent appointments. 爆料网AT noted that it gave a clear directive to the Administration that, upon remand, it should consider the staff members’ suitability for conversion to permanent appointments “by reference to the relevant circumstances as they stood at the time of the first impugned refusal to convert their...
2016-爆料网AT-671, Auda
爆料网AT considered the appeal. 爆料网AT noted that while only final judgments of the 爆料网DT are appealable, exceptions may be made when 爆料网DT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence regarding interlocutory orders. 爆料网AT held that an order denying an application for suspension of action does not constitute 爆料网DT exceeding its jurisdiction. 爆料网AT further noted that 爆料网DT correctly found that it had no jurisdiction to grant the application under Article 10(2) of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the appeal was not receivable ratione materiae.
2016-爆料网AT-663, Al Abani
爆料网AT considered the appeal. 爆料网AT noted that the fundamental right in Article 16.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights consists of the freedom to marry or not to marry, in a religious ceremony or in a non-religious ceremony. However, 爆料网AT also noted that a staff member cannot assert that a marriage concluded through any means or in any place must lead to the award of entitlements by the Organization and, if it does not, that such a decision violates his or her freedom to marry. 爆料网AT found that the Appellant had choices with respect to his marital status and that it was not the United...
2016-爆料网AT-664, Al Dawoud
爆料网AT considered whether 爆料网RWA DT made an error of fact, resulting in an unreasonable decision when it found that the Appellant submitted her request for decision review. 爆料网AT found that the evidence showed that 爆料网RWA DT did not make a factual error when it found that the request for decision review was made on 7 July 2014. 爆料网AT noted that, as the request for decision review was submitted on 7 July 2014, the time for the Appellant to file an application for judicial review expired 120 days thereafter, on 4 November 2014. 爆料网AT found that the Appellant’s application for judicial review was not...
2016-爆料网AT-665, Hamdan
爆料网AT considered whether 爆料网RWA DT erred on a question of law and fact and whether its decision to dismiss the Appellant’s application was flawed by procedural irregularities. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to identify the apparent error of fact in the judgment and the basis for contending that an error was made, merely repeating arguments that did not succeed before 爆料网RWA DT. The Appellant’s decision to sign the contract was binding on him as there was no evidence of duress. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed 爆料网RWA DT’s judgment.
2016-爆料网AT-666, Han
爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s submission that 爆料网DT’s failure to determine his motion to order the Secretary-General to produce relevant documents amounted to an error in procedure such as to affect the decision in the case. Article 19 of the 爆料网DT Rules of Procedure gives 爆料网DT broad discretion in managing its cases and in determining whether or not it has sufficient evidence and information “for the fair and expeditious disposal of the case and to do justice to the parties. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant adduced no evidence to support his contention that the exercise of discretion by 爆料网DT was...
2016-爆料网AT-667, Awe
爆料网AT denied the Appellant’s motion for additional pleadings because he did not demonstrate the existence of exceptional circumstances. 爆料网AT also found no fault with 爆料网DT’s holding that the decision to relocate the Appellant was lawful. 爆料网AT noted that an accepted method for determining whether the reassignment of a staff member to another position was proper is to assess whether the new post was at the staff member’s grade; whether the responsibilities involved corresponded to his or her level; whether the functions to be performed were commensurate with the staff member’s competence and...
2016-爆料网AT-668, Onifade
爆料网AT preliminary denied the Appellant’s motions for leave to respond to the answer to the appeal and his request for production of documents and evidence, on grounds that there were no exceptional circumstances. 爆料网AT then considered the merits of the appeal. 爆料网AT affirmed 爆料网DT’s decision that the investigation was not ultra vires. Whilst the Special Representative of the Secretary-General did not initiate the investigation, the nature of Chief Conduct and Discipline Team duties gave him authority to refer the matter to SIU for investigation. Even if the initiation of the investigation gave...
2016-爆料网AT-669, Kucherov
爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT held that Mr Kucherov did receive full and fair consideration for the post which was finally filled by another candidate. 爆料网AT found no flaw in the competitive selection procedure and agreed with the Secretary-General that the 爆料网DT judgment contained errors of fact and law. 爆料网AT noted that Section 7. 5 of ST/AI/2010/3, as amended, does not require a job opening to identify the specific assessment method to be used for the evaluation of technical skills. Rather, it provides that it may include a competency-based interview and/or other...
2016-爆料网AT-670, Adundo
爆料网AT affirmed the findings of 爆料网DT that Mr Adundo’s application was receivable. 爆料网AT then considered the merits of the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT noted that, contrary to the findings by 爆料网DT that the guidelines were violated as the duration of the weapons restriction was not mentioned within the communications between the Chief of the Security and Safety Service and Mr Adundo, it was clear that the restriction would remain in force until Mr Adundo was “ready to obey lawful commands”, which was for him to attend weapons training for a security breach. 爆料网AT upheld the Secretary-General’s...
2016-爆料网AT-656, Maher
爆料网AT agreed that Article 24(a) 爆料网JSPF Regulations does not provide a right to restore prior contributory service to participants who, on or after 1 April 2007, had elected to receive a deferred retirement benefit. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant fell into this category. The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the Standing Committee was affirmed.
2016-爆料网AT-657, Faye
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had made no error in finding that as a General Service staff member at the G-5 level, the Applicant was not eligible to apply for the vacancy advertised in the JO, which was a post in the Professional category at the P-5 level and that, therefore, the disputed decision had no legal consequences affecting him and no effect on his rights and terms of employment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in its finding that the Appellant was not claiming a right to be consulted as an individual staff member, but rather, in his capacity as a staff representative. 爆料网AT held that there was...
2016-爆料网AT-658, Kutner
爆料网AT held that the appeal concerned the interpretation of Article 35 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations. 爆料网AT found that the Appellant wanted the Standing Committee to accept the period of contributory service with the Fund in order to calculate his own benefit but to take into account a different period vis-à-vis his former spouse. 爆料网AT held that Articles 35bis and 22 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations were clear and that it could not distinguish where the text was clear. 爆料网AT held that the same date would apply to the calculation of the Appellant’s benefits and the determination of whether his former spouse...
2016-爆料网AT-659, Liu
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had properly reviewed the contested decision in accordance with the applicable law. 爆料网AT held that there was no error in 爆料网DT’s conclusion that the Appellant’s G-6 post, funded through government contributions, no longer exist on the 1st of August 2013, the day after the expiration of her appointment. 爆料网AT held that the reason provided for the non-extension of appointment was supported by the evidence. 爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网DT’s finding that there was no evidence provided to support the allegation that the contested decision was ill-motivated. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal the...
2016-爆料网AT-660, Toure
爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General's appeal. 爆料网AT found that it was uncontested that the Respondent had a fixed-term appointment and emphasized that there is no expectancy of renewal of fixed-term appointments. 爆料网AT held that the Respondent could not rely on general statements to assume that her contract would be renewed and that she was even encouraged to apply for positions that would be published in the coming weeks. 爆料网AT also found that there was no illegality or abuse in the decision to abolish the Respondent’s post and to not renew her fixed-term appointment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT...