Search
2020-爆料网AT-1032, Rolli
爆料网AT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2019-爆料网AT-952 by Mr Rolli. Mr Rolli contended that the remand order issued by 爆料网AT, and in particular its reference to the need to have Mr Rolli’s appeal considered by a neural first instance body, coupled with the objective inability of the JAB to function as a neutral first instance process, constituted new facts that required 爆料网AT to revise its judgment. 爆料网AT held that neither the remand order of 爆料网AT nor the need to have the Appellant’s appeal considered by a neutral first instance body, coupled with the objective inability of the...
2020-爆料网AT-1037, Yabowork
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s language, which was strongly critical of the Appellant, was unwarranted. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in finding that the decision to discontinue the payment of her SPA was a legitimate exercise of the Administration’s discretion, as the Appellant no longer met the requirements for it. 爆料网AT held that the discontinuation of the SPA was justified in view of the Administration’s obligation and right to correct such an erroneous situation. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
2020-爆料网AT-1013, Belsito
A telephone conversation that was suggestive of gender discrimination in the decision-making process and was raised by the Appellant in his application was ignored by 爆料网DT. 爆料网DT made an error in the procedure by failing to hold an oral hearing where witnesses could testify about that conversation. 爆料网AT remanded the matter back to a different judge of the 爆料网DT for the production of further evidence, additional findings of fact, and the issuance of a new judgment.
2020-爆料网AT-1021, Collins
爆料网DT did not err in law or in fact when it found that the decision to abolish the post was lawful. However, in not providing reasons for its decision to commute the six-month notice period into compensation, the Organisation failed in its duty to demonstrate that its discretion was not exercised arbitrarily, capriciously, or unlawfully. The Administration failed to meet its burden to minimally demonstrate that the Appellant was given full and fair consideration. The Administration acted arbitrarily and thus failed to exercise its discretion lawfully. The termination of the Appellant’s...
2020-爆料网AT-1035, Gelsei
爆料网AT held that exceptional circumstances existed which warranted an extension of time. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s discretion should have been exercised in the Appellant’s favour because it affected access to justice and there is a presumption that access to justice should not be denied at the outset without compelling reasons, which were absent. 爆料网AT held that circumstances beyond the Appellant’s control prevented him from acting to file his appeal within the time limit and it would be unjust to visit upon the Appellant the consequences of an error (a fail in the electronic filing system) for which...
2020-爆料网AT-1036, Mansour
爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT failed to address some issues before it, in respect of which the Appellant is entitled to a reasoned decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT erred in declining the Appellant’s implicit request for a hearing in person, at least without having considered it and given reasons. 爆料网AT held that the termination of the Appellant’s appointment could not be assessed as hasty, premature, or arbitrary, with particular reference to the Medical Board process. 爆料网AT held that any opportunity of the Appellant’s appointment to that vacancy had therefore passed, irrespective of her...
2020-爆料网AT-1015, Handy
爆料网AT held that there was no express rescission of the impugned decision by the Administration. 爆料网AT held that monthly renewals pending the outcome of the rebuttal of a performance evaluation did not resolve the complaint of the non-renewal of the fixed-term appointment. 爆料网AT held that the monthly renewals did not rescind or supersede the impugned decision and the application could not be considered moot. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in its decision, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT upheld the appeal, vacated the 爆料网DT judgment, and remanded the matter to 爆料网DT for proper...
2020-爆料网AT-1018, Abu Ouda et al
爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT exercised its discretion lawfully to consolidate the cases. 爆料网AT held that the impugned decisions were taken in good faith and on a reasonable basis. 爆料网AT held that there was a bona fide reason to restructure and that it was operationally rational not to renew the Limited Duration Contracts at the time. 爆料网AT held that the Appellants' argument with regard to their acquired rights being violated was without merit. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
2020-爆料网AT-1019, Houran et al
爆料网AT held that the Appellants failed to specifically identify the errors allegedly committed by the 爆料网RWA DT and therefore the appeals were defective for that reason but considered the appeals given that the appellants were not legally represented. 爆料网AT held that any error on a finding of fact of when the Appellants receive notification of the administrative decision did not result in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT held that whether the administrative decision was the expressed verbal communication of the denial to provide compensation or was implied from the refusal or failure to...
2020-爆料网AT-1020, Dibs
爆料网AT considered an application for execution of judgment No. 2017-爆料网AT-798 by Mr. Dibs. 爆料网AT granted in part the application for execution of judgment and ordered 爆料网RWA to fully execute the judgment within 30 calendar days, advising that failure to comply with the deadline would result in a finding of manifest abuse of process, the award of costs, and potentially, a referral for accountability. 爆料网AT considered that the request for moral and pecuniary damages did not fall within the scope of the application.
2020-爆料网AT-1022, El Shanti
爆料网AT considered two appeals (consolidated) by Mr ElShanti of judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2019/051 and judgment No. 爆料网RWA/DT/2019/065 respectively. On the consolidation of the cases, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had broad discretion in managing its cases and that it would only intervene in clear cases of denial of due process of law affecting a party’s right to produce evidence. Accordingly, 爆料网AT rejected Mr ElShanti’s arguments against consolidation. 爆料网AT held that there was no merit to Mr ElShanti’s claims that the characterization of the impugned administrative decision was incorrect, noting that 爆料网RWA...
2020-爆料网AT-1012, Heftberger
爆料网AT denied the request for an oral hearing, finding it would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case. 爆料网AT held, recalling the Spinardi jurisprudence (judgment No. 2019-爆料网AT-957), that the decision on the Appellant’s complaints was not made utilizing a neutral first instance process as required jurisdictionally by Article 2. 10 of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT noted that the appealed decision was made by the ICAO Secretary-General whose own earlier decision(s) the Appellant had challenged. 爆料网AT allowed the appeal and set aside the ICAO Secretary-General’s and/or the AJAB’s...
2020-爆料网AT-1014, Chhikara
爆料网AT held that the reason upon which 爆料网DT decided not to rescind the contested decision, i. e. the lapse of time, was insufficient justification. 爆料网AT held that, given the grossly negligent illegalities in which the selection process was conducted as found by 爆料网DT, rescission of the contested decision was mandatory and could not be avoided on the basis of the excessive length of time between the filing of the application and the 爆料网DT judgment. 爆料网AT held that allowing the decision not to select the Appellant to remain in effect as if it was correct, despite its clear illegality, was not...
2020-爆料网AT-1017, Salhi et al
As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT exercised its discretion in consolidating the cases lawfully and appropriately. 爆料网AT held the impugned decision was taken in good faith and on a reasonable basis. 爆料网AT held that there was a bona fide reason to restructure and that it was operationally rational not to renew certain fixed-term appointments on a full-time basis but to reclassify them to part-time appointments. 爆料网AT held that the Appellants’ claim that their acquired rights were violated was without merit. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.
2020-爆料网AT-1024, Nyawa
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Mr. Nyawa. 爆料网AT held that there was clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Nyawa committed the disciplinary offenses attributed to him. 爆料网AT held that the established facts amounted to misconduct on the part of Mr. Nyawa. 爆料网AT disagreed with 爆料网DT that a written censure was subsumed by the sanction of deferment for eligibility for promotion, however, 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT’s holding that the deferment for eligibility for promotion was sufficient sanction was not a manifestly unreasonable decision warranting 爆料网AT intervention...
2020-爆料网AT-1025, Murad
爆料网RWA DT did not err in its determinations or award of moral damages, which was a reasonable amount in the circumstances. 爆料网RWA DT did not err in deciding not to order any material damages. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.
2020-爆料网AT-1029, El Madhoun
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Commissioner-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT correctly concluded that 爆料网RWA had failed to provide sufficiently clear, precise, and intelligible reasoning and had not acted lawfully, reasonably, and fairly. 爆料网AT held that once a staff member was eligible for EVR in accordance with paragraph 8 of Area Staff Rule 109. 2, paragraph 9 became applicable and its text was clear. 爆料网AT held that Mr. El Madhoun was eligible for EVR and it was not established that budgetary constraints were either ground for rejecting his request for EVR or for not withdrawing his notice...
2020-爆料网AT-1040, Robinson
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in the amount of compensation it awarded, having considered all relevant circumstances, including the mitigating factor of the Appellant securing new employment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not commit an error of law or make manifestly unreasonable factual findings in its award of financial damages. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in law, and followed binding 爆料网AT precedent, by refusing to award moral damages based solely on the Appellant’s testimony. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant had had the opportunity before 爆料网DT to apply to adduce the relevant evidence but had...
2020-爆料网AT-1016, Abu Ata et al
爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT exercised its discretion to consolidate the cases lawfully and appropriately. 爆料网AT held that there was a bona fide reason to restructure and that it was operationally rational to abolish the posts and reclassify them from full-time to part-time posts at that time. 爆料网AT held that the Appellants’ contention that their acquired rights were violated had no merit. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.
2020-爆料网AT-1026, Diallo
爆料网AT considered an application revision of judgment No. 2019-爆料网AT-936 by Mr Diallo. 爆料网AT held that Mr Diallo failed to establish the statutory conditions that had to be fulfilled before a judgment could be revised, namely there was no discovery of a decisive fact which was, at the time the judgment was rendered, unknown to 爆料网AT and to him. 爆料网AT held that an application for revision of a judgment that does not meet the statutory prerequisites cannot be a collateral means of attack on the judgment or allowed to be the second right of final appeal. 爆料网AT dismissed the application for revision.