±¬ÁÏÍø

Receivability

After considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal found that the challenge to the decision to abolish the Applicant¡¯s post and terminate his continuing appointment was not receivable. It held that the only matter before it was the decision not to extend the Applicant¡¯s employment to cover his sick leave, but instead to terminate his appointment and separate him while he was on certified sick leave.

Merits

First, the Tribunal assessed whether the Applicant was on certified sick leave at the time of his separation on 31 December 2023.

Although sick leave was not formally recorded...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in finding that the Administration had not proven by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Ammar made the Facebook post because the Inspector General¡¯s Office (IGO) inappropriately discounted the possibility that Mr. Ammar¡¯s Facebook account had been hacked. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the Administration met its burden of establishing that it was highly probable that Mr. Ammar posted the Comment and thus publicly expressed support for an honour killing. The Administration produced uncontradicted evidence that the comment came from Mr. Ammar¡¯s Facebook account and he...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that as per ISA¡¯s Staff Rule the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT has the competence to ¡°order an interim measure to provide temporary relief to either party to prevent irreparable harm and to maintain consistency with the decision taken at the first instance level¡±. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT also has jurisdiction to order interim measures in appropriate cases arising out of an ISA dispute as is the case in Mr. Hall¡¯s Motion.

However, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that Mr. Hall had failed to demonstrate that relief by way of interim measures was necessary to prevent irreparable harm and to maintain consistency with the JAB¡¯s decision. Mr...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the staff member had applied for vacancies of different posts, at different times, with different selection processes, and had not been selected for different reasons. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had correctly decided that each of these decisions was separate and there was no evidence that they were related. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that she had not met her burden of showing that the impugned Judgment was defective.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the application in respect of the post in Pretoria was clearly out of time and in respect of the post in Nairobi premature and, as such, not receivable...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT correctly determined that the non-selection decision was superseded and rendered moot by the Administration's subsequent rescission of the decision, which ended the selection process without anyone being selected for the position. It concluded that, from that moment, the non-selection decision ceased to have any legal effect and was no longer a live issue on which the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had jurisdiction to pass judgment on.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT further affirmed that it was entirely within the Administration¡¯s authority to rescind the non-selection decision given the procedural irregularities...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the staff member had filed numerous and confusing claims and applications that had been the subject of various reviews by the Management Evaluation Unit, the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT and the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT, all of which essentially attempted to ensure that the Administration continued to pay her benefits for medical reasons after expiration of her fixed-term appointment.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that her submissions failed to identify in precise terms a specific administrative decision capable of being reviewed. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the so-called non-decisions or incomplete decisions identified by her were not...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT erred when it found Ms. Fakhouri¡¯s application was receivable.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that despite being a staff member, the decision with which Ms. Fakhouri took issue was one which related to the terms of a potential contract not as a staff member but as an independent contractor and therefore the contested decision was not one that was appealable. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT emphasized that Article 2(1)(a) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT Statute makes clear that appeals can be brought against administrative decisions where such decisions relate to the staff member¡¯s terms of appointment. But the...

The disciplinary decision was based on two allegations: first, that the staff member committed a physical assault during a domestic dispute; and second, that the staff member failed to immediately report an arrest and criminal proceedings to the Secretary?General, contrary to staff rule 1.5(d). Regarding the assault allegation, the Tribunal found the evidence sufficient and compelling. It relied on contemporaneous police records, a judicial order of protection identifying the staff member as the aggressor, photographic evidence of injury, consistent sworn statements obtained during the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that Article 9(4) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT Statute regarding the nature of the judicial review that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT conducts in disciplinary cases did not apply to the instant case as it was adopted after the hearing was held. The parties presented their evidence, including a chronology of agreed facts as well as live testimony, and made their respective post-hearing submissions, under a legal framework where Article 9(4) was not operative and it would be inappropriate, and a denial of due process, to apply a new evidentiary framework at the point of decision, ex post facto.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the procedures applied to fill the Position sought by the staff member were consistent with the applicable rules. Although the OCHA advertised the Position without any pre-determined restriction to rostered candidates, and received some 151 applications, it ultimately decided to select a rostered candidate, thereby excluding the staff member and many others from consideration. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Administration was well within its prerogative to do so, as the plain reading of Section 9.5 of Administrative Instruction ST/AI/2010/3/Rev.1 (Staff selection system) grants...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Fund reasonably chose a 30-year timeframe for its statistical analysis to determine whether there were ¡°aberrant results¡± in terms of pensions received by beneficiaries who had chosen Slovakia as their country of residence. Similarly, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the conclusions drawn by the Fund from the analysis were properly reached, highlighting that the graph showed a wide disparity between resident beneficiaries who separated from 1993 to 2007 and those who separated afterwards, a disparity solely due to differences in separation dates.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the suspension...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that Mr. Slayyeh did not file a proper appeal of the impugned Judgment but rather was bringing a new claim for compensation that had not been submitted to the Dispute Tribunal. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that he could not introduce on appeal an issue not previously presented to the first instance tribunal as it is a violation of the due process rights of the other party and does not comply with the two-tier system of administration of justice.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the remedies available under Article 10(5) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT Statute allow the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT to rescind the contested decision or order...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the staff member had been notified of the reclassification of the post he encumbered by e-mail without comments on the basis for the decision. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT also noted that he had not been promoted to the reclassified post before separation from service.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had correctly determined that the staff member knew or reasonably should have known by the date he received notification of the reclassification or, at the very latest, by the date the vacancy of the reclassified post was advertised in Inspira, that his post had been reclassified and that he had not...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that none of the reasons provided by Mr. Hejab, considered individually or collectively, were convincing enough to consider his case exceptional, so as to warrant the award of higher compensation than set by Article 10(5) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT Statute.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it is not unusual for an older staff member, particularly one who is close to retirement, to have difficulty in finding another job. Likewise, although there are difficult economic conditions where he lives, this is also not the type of factor that warrants compensation in excess of the statutory norm.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was of the view that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s analysis of the applicable legal framework governing the education grant, specifically the costs admissible for reimbursement, had been erroneous and the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had exceeded its jurisdiction when it found the promulgation of the amended administrative instruction unlawful. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had failed to provide the reasons, facts and law on which it had based its Judgment.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the fees which were clearly intended to cover extra-curricular activities or general non-academic services, and were not intended to cover administrative...

The Tribunal rescinded the decision not to select the Applicant for Job Opening # 214053 due to unlawful bias, with an alternative to pay Applicant two years of the difference in pay between his current position and the would have been new post, had he been selected in the challenged process.

Persuant toArticle 10.8 of the Dispute Tribunal Statute the Respondent¡¯s counsel is referred to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for possible action to enforce accountability for his false statement and related misconduct in these proceedings, and to his national bar authority for such...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that there was clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Hunt, in coordination with colleagues, was covertly communicating with a news media reporter on the Investment Fund transaction, the approval process, and the former Representative of the Secretary-General (RSG)¡¯s role and had thereby leaked information to the reporter.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Mr. Hunt failed to prove that his action of reporting possible misconduct within ±¬ÁÏÍøJSPF to outside sources was a protected activity under the Secretary-General¡¯s Bulletin on protection against retaliation. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT¡¯s...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that the Agency¡¯s job classification tool had been used to reclassify the staff members¡¯ posts. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT had not erred when it had decided the case in the absence of the full document of the International Civil Service Commission¡¯s ¡°Master Standard for Classification¡±. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the Commissioner-General that the Classification Reports were relevant and sufficient for the ±¬ÁÏÍøRWA DT¡¯s determinations.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that notwithstanding the various anomalies in the reclassification process, the staff members had failed to show anything specific that...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT had not erred in finding that it had been proven by clear and convincing evidence that the staff member had engaged in harassment and abuse of authority, used her office for personal reasons to prejudice the position of a colleague, disclosed sensitive information, failed to report the possible misconduct of others, used a personal e-mail address contrary to the applicable provisions, and exchanged inappropriate messages about colleagues.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that regardless of whether she had been a whistleblower engaged in a protected activity, there was no evidence that...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT found that ±¬ÁÏÍøICEF had conducted the selection process in a manner fully consistent with its administrative legal framework, including having provided detailed reasons for considering the staff member unsuitable for the post. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that his candidature had received full and fair consideration, and he had not shown through clear and convincing evidence that he had been denied a fair chance of selection. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that there was no evidence of bias or ill-motive against him.

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT was of the view that ±¬ÁÏÍøICEF¡¯s failure to notify the staff member of the non-selection...