Search
2012-爆料网AT-213, Squassoni
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT previously addressed the issues at hand and, therefore, there were no grounds to consider that the Appellant’s rights to due process were violated by a judgment by default or by not considering her arguments. 爆料网AT noted that 爆料网DT did not err in concluding that there was no administrative decision concerning the Appellant’s return to the G-4 post capable of judicial review under Article 2(1) of the 爆料网DT Statute, as that return was the predictable and logical consequence of her non-selection. 爆料网AT relied on its holding in Zhang (2010-爆料网AT-078) and held that 爆料网DT correctly...
2012-爆料网AT-214, Fradin De Bellabre
爆料网AT held that the contentions against judgment No. 爆料网DT/2009/004 were not receivable since only appeals against judgments on merits are receivable. Regarding the contentions against judgment No. 爆料网DT/2011/080, 爆料网AT held that there was no need to produce further documents. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly applied Article 10. 5 of the 爆料网DT Statute in ordering compensation in lieu and that the Appellant had no right to request 爆料网AT to order his reinstatement. 爆料网AT noted that the non-renewal was based on a tainted performance evaluation and that 爆料网DT, therefore, ordered the rescission of the...
2012-爆料网AT-215, Cabrera
The Secretary-General’s appeal and Mr Cabrera’s cross-appeal centred on the issue of whether placing a staff member on SLWFP violates their due process rights. 爆料网AT noted that, in this case, 爆料网DT created a new class of special leave, where the staff member was actually suspended with full pay. 爆料网AT did not agree with the Secretary-General’s contention that 爆料网DT erred in concluding that the Office of Internal Oversight Services’ investigation was not a preliminary investigation, as Mr Cabrera was put on leave using all the reasons under which he could be suspended. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT...
2012-爆料网AT-210, Finniss
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. Noting the absence of a written record, 爆料网AT held that it could not confirm if the procedure under Article 17 (Oral Evidence) of the 爆料网DT RoP was complied with, whether the witnesses made a declaration under Article 17(3) of the 爆料网DT RoP before giving their statements, or whether the witnesses were cross-examined by the opposing party under Article 17(1) of the 爆料网DT RoP. 爆料网AT set aside the 爆料网DT judgment and remanded the case to 爆料网DT for a fresh hearing based on the pleadings already on record in a matter consistent with the 爆料网AT judgment.
2012-爆料网AT-211, Scheepers
爆料网AT considered the appeal, in which the Appellant contended that exceptional circumstances existed that would merit a waiver of the time limit, allowing his application to be admitted. 爆料网AT noted that, in such an instance, it is the applicant’s responsibility to convince the tribunal of such circumstances. 爆料网AT found that the Appellant did not overcome this hurdle before 爆料网DT and held that 爆料网DT did not err in rejecting the Appellant’s contentions that he had exceptional circumstances. 爆料网AT further held that ignorance of the law is no excuse and the Appellant’s reliance on erroneous advice...
2012-爆料网AT-202, Buscaglia
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in finding that the statement dated 26 November 2003 was neither a decision to terminate the Appellant’s appointment nor a disciplinary measure. 爆料网AT held that the statement was merely a publicly stated opinion which had no legal consequences on the Appellant who, in addition to having already been informed on 29 October 2003 that his contract would not be renewed beyond 30 November 2003, had also declared that he would not be able or willing to continue working for 爆料网ODC after his contract expired. 爆料网AT accordingly dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT...
2012-爆料网AT-203, Comerford-Verzuu
爆料网AT considered Ms Comerford-Verzuu’s appeal and the Secretary-General’s cross-appeal, regarding whether 爆料网DT was correct in holding that the contested decision was dated 2 August 2005 and that the request for administrative review was time-barred. 爆料网AT found that the OIOS reply of 2 August 2005 was the administrative decision of which Ms Comerford-Verzuu was seeking a review. 爆料网AT held that the subsequent correspondence was unwarranted and did not extend the time limit for seeking administrative review of the first administrative order. Accordingly, the time limit for seeking administrative...
2012-爆料网AT-204, Kamal
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held, in agreement with the Secretary-General, agreed that there were no grounds to award compensation. 爆料网AT noted that there was no administrative decision being contested in this case, as both parties accepted the decision to promote Ms Kamal and she had not identified any illegality that could lead to an award of compensation. 爆料网AT found that the delay in completing the selection process could not be considered a valid ground for compensation, since the circumstances of the case did not show any negligence or violation of specific...
2012-爆料网AT-205, Marsh
The Secretary-General appealed and Mr Marsh filed a cross-appeal, challenging the legality of the interview process and the compensation award. With respect to the first issue, 爆料网AT found that the records showed a proper and professional proceeding during the interviews and the report of its outcome was based on evaluations objectively motivated, and Mr Marsh was accorded the objective consideration and equal treatment to which all candidates are entitled. With respect to the second issue, 爆料网AT noted that not every violation of due process will necessarily lead to an award of compensation...
2012-爆料网AT-206, Liverakos
爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s appeal. 爆料网AT noted that, contrary to the Appellant’s contention, 爆料网DT was not required to ascertain whether the closure of the Centre was a consequence of mismanagement or of any other factor since the primary purpose was not to get rid of the Appellant. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT did not fail to exercise its jurisdiction by not ascertaining whether the closure of the Centre was the result of serious mismanagement and irregularities. 爆料网AT also found that the Appellant failed to submit sufficiently clear and convincing evidence that the desire to retaliate against him...
2012-爆料网AT-207, Hallal
爆料网AT considered an appeal, in which the Appellant claimed that 爆料网DT committed procedural errors in allowing the Secretary-General to embark on a de novo fact-finding inquiry and that the disciplinary measure of separation was disproportionate. 爆料网AT held that it was within the competence of 爆料网DT to hold oral hearings as well as to order the production of evidence for fair and expeditious disposal of the proceedings. 爆料网AT held that the Administration bears the burden of establishing that the alleged misconduct, for which a disciplinary measure has been taken against a staff member, occurred and...
2012-爆料网AT-208, Warintarawat
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.
2012-爆料网AT-209, Applicant
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General against the judgment on the merits (爆料网DT/2011/054) and two further appeals by both the Secretary-General and the Applicant of the judgment on compensation (爆料网DT/2011/131). Relying on its previous holding in Bertucci (2011/爆料网AT/114), 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in finding that the Administration violated the Applicant’s due process rights, as no actual prejudice was found. 爆料网AT held that the established facts, as admitted by the Applicant, clearly demonstrated that he engaged in the sexual harassment of local employees and used his position of...
2012-爆料网AT-198, Meron
爆料网AT noted that 爆料网DT correctly stated that the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal considered and rejected all of the Appellant’s other pleas and that for this reason, the matter of interest was res judicata. 爆料网AT also noted that 爆料网DT ordered the Secretary-General to make a payment of USD 25,000 as compensation for the excessive and inordinate delays and the emotional harm and to arrange for a Medical Board to consider outstanding invoices. 爆料网AT found that, as the Secretary-General did not appeal, he had therefore accepted the 爆料网DT’s decision and financial award. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s decision...
2012-爆料网AT-199, Worsley
爆料网AT considered Ms Worsley’s appeal and the Secretary-General’s cross-appeal. 爆料网AT held that there was no evidence that OSLA’s decision to not represent Ms Worsley was based on her disability. 爆料网AT noted that Ms Worsley did not show how OSLA’s actions affected her rights or her case, as she was simply repeating arguments that 爆料网DT previously considered in its judgment. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and cross-appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment with regard to its decision that the right of staff members to receive assistance from OSLA does not amount to a right to be represented by OSLA.
2012-爆料网AT-200, Majbri
爆料网AT held that there was no valid claim of unfair treatment and discrimination by the Appellant against the former Chief of ATS and 爆料网DT therefore correctly limited its consideration to the interview process. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant was merely repeating arguments that were adequately considered by 爆料网DT and that there were no reasons to reverse 爆料网DT’s judgment. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
2012-爆料网AT-201, Obdeijn
The Appellant contested the 爆料网DT finding that he was afforded full and fair consideration for the position of Chief and argued that he suffered unfair and discriminatory treatment. 爆料网AT held that if the Administration does not comply with a Tribunal’s order to disclose the reasons for an administrative decision, as such, the Tribunal cannot automatically conclude that the decision was arbitrary, but it is entitled to draw an adverse inference from the refusal. 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT finding that the Administration’s decision must be deemed unlawful, as the Secretary-General refused to comply...
2012-爆料网AT-190, Bekele
爆料网AT considered an appeal limited to the claim that 爆料网DT ordered inadequate compensation for the losses he sustained as a result of various acts and omissions on the part of the Administration. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT took due regard for the arguments the Appellant brought in his appeal and that 爆料网DT, having regarded the parameters of what it could compensate the Appellant for, made adequate provisions for the Appellant’s economic and social losses in its overall award to him. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the 爆料网DT judgment.
2012-爆料网AT-191, Muratore
爆料网AT noted that only circumstances beyond an applicant’s control that prevented them from timely exercising the right of appeal may be considered “exceptional circumstances,” justifying a waiver of the statutory time limit. 爆料网AT noted that an applicant’s initial mistaken belief that decisions were lawful cannot be deemed to constitute exceptional circumstances justifying a waiver of the time limit to appeal those decisions, especially when they had every means of obtaining information from the Administration. 爆料网AT was not persuaded by the Appellant’s arguments upon appeal and did not find any...
2012-爆料网AT-192, Akyeampong
爆料网AT considered appeals from both the Secretary-General and M Akyeampong on the issue of whether Ms Akyeampong could be denied a promotion on account of the two reprimands. 爆料网AT held that the two reprimands had not been an obstacle to Ms Akyeampong filling a D-1 position or being recommended for a promotion. Moreover, 爆料网AT held that the presence of the two reprimands had not debarred her from being promoted during the 2009 annual promotion session. 爆料网AT allowed Ms Akyeampong’s appeal in part, rescinded the impugned decision and dismissed the Secretary-General’s appeal, with Judge Weinberg de...