Search
2021-爆料网AT-1109, Bozic et al & Alsaqqaf et al
Appeals dismissed, 爆料网DT Judgments upheld. The Tribunals do not have reviewability of ICSC decisions, they do have jurisdiction to review the Secretary-General’s mechanical power in implementing such decisions on narrow grounds for legality. The ICSC decision to adjust the salary scale and post-adjustment allowance multiplier was not a reviewable decision. The Secretary-General’s implementation of that decision was an administrative decision as it was not a general policy but had adverse individual impact per staff member via their payslips and was therefore receivable. While receivable the...
2021-爆料网AT-1110, Bettighofer et al, Andreeva et al
Appeals dismissed, 爆料网DT Judgments upheld. The Tribunals do not have reviewability of ICSC decisions, they do have jurisdiction to review the Secretary-General’s mechanical power in implementing such decisions on narrow grounds for legality. The ICSC decision to adjust the salary scale and post-adjustment allowance multiplier was not a reviewable decision. The Secretary-General’s implementation of that decision was an administrative decision as it was not a general policy but had adverse individual impact per staff member via their payslips and was therefore receivable. While receivable the...
2021-爆料网AT-1111, Avognon et al, Angelova et al
The Tribunals do not have reviewability of ICSC decisions, they do have jurisdiction to review the Secretary-General’s mechanical power in implementing such decisions on narrow grounds for legality. The ICSC decision to adjust the salary scale and post-adjustment allowance multiplier was not a reviewable decision. The Secretary-General’s implementation of that decision was an administrative decision as it was not a general policy but had adverse individual impact per staff member via their payslips and was therefore receivable. While receivable the ICSC decision remained not reviewable for...
2021-爆料网AT-1106, Giles III
爆料网AT agreed that the Secretary-General has implied discretion to revoke benefits if a staff member does not satisfactorily furnish evidence of continued eligibility of existing entitlements, which may arise because of a change in circumstances. 爆料网AT also found that 爆料网DT did not err when it held that the legal frameworks for the two benefit systems are different and that the decisions made under the two legal regimes need not be consistent. Article 33 of the 爆料网SPF Regulations does not require proof of a loss of earning capacity and the requirement of “incapacitation” is a purely medical...
2021-爆料网AT-1107, Abd Al Shakour et al, Aksioutine et al
Appeals dismissed, 爆料网DT Judgments upheld. The Tribunals do not have reviewability of ICSC decisions, they do have jurisdiction to review the Secretary-General’s mechanical power in implementing such decisions on narrow grounds for legality. The ICSC decision to adjust the salary scale and post-adjustment allowance multiplier was not reviewable. The Secretary-General’s implementation of that decision was an administrative decision as it was not a general policy but had individual adverse impact per staff member via their payslips and was therefore receivable. While receivable, the ICSC decision...
2021-爆料网AT-1080, Mukeba
爆料网AT held the staff member’s appeal of the 爆料网DT Judgment was defective as it failed to identify any of the five grounds of appeal set out in Article 2.1 of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT ruled that the appellant had failed to explain why the dismissal of his application by the 爆料网DT was erroneous. Additionally, 爆料网AT also held that it found no error in the practice of the 爆料网DT to dismiss an application for want of prosecution when there is sufficient reason to assume that the applicant is no longer interested in the litigation, based on Article 19 (Case management) and Article 36 (Procedural matters not...
2021-爆料网AT-1095, Marius Mihail Russo-Got
The evidence of procedural errors and irregularities supported the Dispute Tribunal’s findings of fact that lead to the justifiable conclusion that, had the irregularities not occurred, Mr Russo-Got had a foreseeable and significant chance of selection given his qualifications. The approach adopted by 爆料网DT and by which 爆料网DT assessed Mr.; Russo-Got’s chances of being selected for the post as one in five was reasonable. In the absence of errors of fact or law by 爆料网DT, 爆料网AT defers to its discretion in awarding and quantifying the pecuniary damages.
2021-爆料网AT-1096, Emile Abdel Rahman Dabbour
爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT erred in law or in failing to take into account in that calculation the probable length of Mr Dabbour’s tenure in that role which was known to have been of a fixed duration of three years. 爆料网AT held that, although the 爆料网RWA DT in Mr Dabbour’s case had recorded its conclusions on some of these considerations, it did not do so at all in respect of others making it difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain objectively how it reached the apparently modest figure of compensation in lieu of recission of USD 1,000. 爆料网AT held that there was nothing to indicate why 爆料网RWA DT did...
2021-爆料网AT-1099, Antonio Ponce-Gonzalez
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in considering that the recruitment exercise was the same and the cancellation of RFR 104637 was just a preparatory step of the selection process because 爆料网DT ignored the difference in the requirements and in the legal framework applicable to those very distinctive ways of contracting and in which each of these contracts is deployed. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT also erred in fact when it found that certain 爆料网AT precedents were applicable to the present case because the facts in the present case are not materially identical to those in the cited 爆料网AT precedents.
2021-爆料网AT-1100, Marius Mihail Russo-Got
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s interpretation of the totality of the evidence on the record was reasonable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly found that Mr Russo-Got was Candidate A for the P-3 test and Candidate F for the P-4 test and that 爆料网OPS had submitted contemporaneous documentation showing that he was not recommended because he had failed the written assessment for the two tests. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT properly reviewed the contested decisions in accordance with the applicable law.
2021-爆料网AT-1101, Testargachew Zewdie Kebede
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in stating that it had no jurisdiction as Mr Kebede’s claim concerned the internal affairs of the staff union, and therefore, an area protected from employer interference. 爆料网AT held, however, that error was without consequence because Mr Kebede’s claim for compensation was otherwise time-barred per Staff Rule 3.17(ii). 爆料网DT also erred in finding that Mr Kebede’s application for a transfer was not receivable for lack of jurisdiction.
2021-爆料网AT-1102, Archana Patkar
爆料网AT found no fault with the 爆料网DT’s reasoning that the letter of 24 November 2017 was unambiguous and unconditional about the separation of Ms Patkar upon the expiration of her appointment and agreed that the letter conveyed the final decision of the Administration not to renew her appointment. 爆料网AT held that the letter produced a direct adverse consequence which was not contingent upon the possibility of Ms Patkar’s selection for any other position. Nor did the relevant provision in the letter that the non-renewal decision would cease to be applicable if Ms Patkar should be selected for...
2021-爆料网AT-1079, Reilly
爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT finding that it lacked jurisdiction in respect of the staff member’s application to review the determination of the Second Alternate Chair. 爆料网AT noted that the subject matter jurisdiction of 爆料网DT is limited to the review of administrative decisions. The determinations of the Second Alternate Chair do not constitute administrative decisions, and as such, any application to review them before the 爆料网DT is not receivable. 爆料网AT highlighted that ST/SGB/2017/2/Rev.1 confers on the Ethics Office only the power to recommend, advise and refer, and Section 10.3 of ST/SGB/2017/2/...
2021-爆料网AT-1094, Khalid Younis
爆料网AT was not able to detect any errors in the 爆料网DT Judgment, which is in accord with the consistent jurisprudence of 爆料网AT.
2021-爆料网AT-1090, Marius Mihail Russo-Got
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly concluded that Mr Russo-Got’s application against the abolition of his post was not receivable, as he had failed to make a request for management evaluation within time. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT also correctly dismissed his application against the non-renewal of his FTA because he had received notice of the date of the non-renewal, there was no express promise to renew, and 爆料网OPS was not obliged to find him an alternative post.
2021-爆料网AT-1091, Leobard Antoine Houenou
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly found that the non-extension of Mr Houenou’s temporary appointment was a proper exercise of discretion in light of the mission’s budgetary situation.
2021-爆料网AT-1092, Olga Mokrova
爆料网DT correctly found that Ms Mokrova’s application was not receivable ratione materiae because she filed a request for management evaluation beyond the 60 days of the notification of the contested decision by the Under-Secretary-General for DSS.
2021-爆料网AT-1093, Leonid Dolgopolov
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s finding that the challenge to the decision by the Secretary-General not to waive Mr Dolgopolov’s immunity was not receivable on the ground that it was an executive/political decision is incorrect. 爆料网AT held, however, that 爆料网DT was correct in finding Mr Dolgopolov’s applications not receivable, but for other reasons. 爆料网AT held that Mr Dolgopolov’s applications were not receivable, because he did not refer the impugned decision regarding his request to sue the Ukrainian Ambassador to management evaluation, and the decision in respect of G-4 visa restrictions imposed by the...
2021-爆料网AT-1098, Mwetaminwa
爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网DT and found that the administrative decision could not be regarded as a “disguised termination”. 爆料网AT held that the staff member was not separated from service on 29 May 2019, and he in fact continued to retain his full position, rights, and entitlements of a staff member until the expiry of his FTA on 30 June 2019.
2021-爆料网AT-1078, Abdalla Mohammed Abdalla
Noting that an appeal against an interlocutory order would only be receivable in instances when it is clear and manifest that 爆料网DT exceeded its jurisdiction or competence, 爆料网AT actually rejected the Secretary-General’s appeal on the basis that it was moot. 爆料网AT noted that 爆料网DT had since disposed of the underlying case by Order No. 169; (NBI/2020) because the former staff never filed an application with the tribunal, even after being granted an extension.