爆料网

Search

By Tribunal
By Registry Location
Issuance Type
Date of Judgement/Order
More info
By Tribunal
By Registry Location
Issuance Type
Date of Judgement/Order
More info
显示3701 -3720 的4374
下载
2011-爆料网AT-181, Alauddin

爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to establish that the 爆料网DP decision to contact the Pakistani Government directly to enquire about its deputation policy was improperly motivated. With regard to the new communication upon which the Appellant wished to rely, 爆料网AT held that it was new evidence, for which leave was required, in order to adduce it before 爆料网AT. 爆料网AT did not find any exceptional circumstances existed to require it to consider the new evidence. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in taking into consideration the conditions governing the Appellant’s deputation in order to determine his...

2011-爆料网AT-182, O'Neill

爆料网AT concurred with 爆料网DT that the Appellant neither appealed the administrative decision not to select him for the post, nor challenged the selection process or the JAB’s conclusion, but rather he discussed the release of a Confidential Letter which occurred after the selection process. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in finding that the appeal was not receivable with respect to the non-promotion. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to establish that 爆料网DT committed errors warranting the reversal of its determination that his challenge to the decision to release the Confidential Letter was not...

2011-爆料网AT-168, Yapa

爆料网AT considered appeals by both the Secretary-General and Mr Yapa. On the issue of the two-year ban on promotion, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not commit an error of law in considering that the general legal principle that a sanction may not be imposed on any person unless expressly provided for by a rule in force on the date of the facts held against that person must be respected in disciplinary matters. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err on a question of law in finding that the sanction of a two-year ban on promotion lacked a legal basis. On the written censure and demotion, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did...

2011-爆料网AT-164, Molari

爆料网AT recalled that when a disciplinary sanction is imposed by the Administration, the role of the Tribunal is to examine whether the facts, on which the sanction is based, have been established, whether the established facts qualify as misconduct, and whether the sanction is proportionate to the offence. 爆料网AT held that in this case, the facts were so clear as to be irrefutable; no matter what the standard, the Administration met its burden of proof. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

2011-爆料网AT-163, Masri

爆料网AT considered an application for revision judgment No. 2010-爆料网AT-098. 爆料网AT held that the application did not meet the statutory requirements of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the alleged new information or misinterpretation of the date of a transaction did not constitute circumstances that warranted a revision, because they would not result in the exclusion of the main reasons stated by 爆料网AT for vacating the 爆料网DT judgment and affirming the administrative decision of summary dismissal. 爆料网AT held that the application was not admissible since it repeated an argument already examined and...

2011-爆料网AT-161, Kasyanov

爆料网AT considered an application for interpretation of judgment No. 2010-爆料网AT-076 by Mr Kasyanov in which he requested clarification as to whether the compensation awarded by 爆料网AT was to be determined as of the date the breach occurred or as of the date the judgment was issued. 爆料网AT accepted the application and held that the compensation was to be calculated as of the date of the 爆料网AT judgment.

2011-爆料网AT-162, Azzouni

Ms. Azzouni filed an application for revision of judgment No. 2020-爆料网AT-081 for clarification of the date upon which the two years’ net base salary was to be calculated and requested that it be set as of the date of the judgment, or, alternatively, that an interest rate be applied to the compensation awarded from the date of separation to that of the judgment. 爆料网AT held that it would treat the application as an application for interpretation under Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT Statute. On the basis that the purpose of compensation is to place a staff member in the same position he or she would...

爆料网DT/2011/178, Gehr

Receivability/administrative decision: Preliminary decisions such as the choice of an appropriate basis for a staff member’s performance appraisal do not have direct legal effects on his/her rights. They can only be reviewed within the context of the assessment of the final decision, that is, the outcome of the staff member’s performance appraisal.Delegation of authority: A delegation of authority should not be guessed at or presumed. It must precede the taking of a decision and is not synonymous with retrospective rubberstamping.Classification of posts/generic job profiles: Section 2.2 of ST...

爆料网DT/2011/177, Lex

爆料网DT held that the Applicant clearly identified the administrative decision she wished to contest, and the fact that her Counsel stated that the contested decision was dated 14 April 2010 (the day of her being advised of her non-selection) and not 13 July 2010 (the date of the OIOS/USG’s ultimate selection decision) did not make any difference, as the latter decision was merely confirming the former and could be perceived as being impliedly contested in the application. 爆料网DT also held that the Under Secretary-General of the Office of Internal Oversight Services’ ultimate selection decision...

爆料网DT/2011/176, Kananura

爆料网DT held that the Applicant satisfied the test that the decision appeared to be prima facie unlawful. 爆料网DT held that the Applicant satisfied the urgency test. 爆料网DT noted that the decision would leave five days, from the date of the Judgment, for the Applicant to obtain temporary employment for a period of three months. 爆料网DT held that a stay in the implementation of the decision, albeit for the limited period of an additional 25 calendar days, until the management evaluation is due on 7 November 2011, would serve the purpose of allowing sufficient time for the Respondent to carry out a proper...

爆料网DT/2011/175, De Saint Robert

Scope of judicial review: It is the selection panel’s role to assess the language skills of candidates. In this respect, it is not for the Tribunal to substitute its own assessment for that of the selection panel, except where the panel made a manifest error of assessment.Notification and legality of administrative decisions: Irregularities affecting the notification of an administrative decision have no effect on the legality of that decision since such legality must be assessed as at the date on which the decision was made and not based on later circumstances, such as the notification...

爆料网DT/2011/174, Baron

The Applicant requested the Tribunal to find that he suffered a prejudice equivalent to a 60% permanent loss of ENT functions and a 10% permanent loss of respiratory functions and to compensate him accordingly. He further requested the Tribunal to award him two years’ net base salary as compensation for the prejudice suffered as a result of the Organization’s failure to ensure the security and safety of its staff in Bagdad. The Tribunal found that the latter request was not receivable as it did not stem from a refusal decision by the Secretary-General, a decision which, in any event, should...

爆料网DT/2011/172, Gordon

The Tribunal finds that the selection process was flawed but that the Applicant has not established a causal link between the irregularity and the harm he claims to have suffered. Assessing the legality of the contested decision: When the Administration decides to use a specific procedure, it is bound to fully comply with this procedure. Thus, if the Administration had determined that applications for a vacant position would be assessed by a panel of five members, all five panel members should have actually participated in the assessment, and the failure to comply with the procedure resulted...