蘑菇视频

Article 10

  • Article 1.2
  • Article 10
  • Article 10.1
  • Article 11.3
  • Article 13
  • Article 15
  • Article 16
  • Article 16.1
  • Article 17
  • Article 17.1
  • Article 18
  • Article 18.1
  • Article 18bis
  • Article 18bis.1
  • Article 19
  • Article 2
  • Article 20
  • Article 20.2
  • Article 22
  • Article 23
  • Article 24
  • Article 25
  • Article 26
  • Article 27
  • Article 29
  • Article 29(a)
  • Article 29(b)
  • Article 3.1
  • Article 30
  • Article 31
  • Article 31.1
  • Article 4.2
  • Article 7
  • Article 7.1
  • Article 7.1(a)
  • Article 7.2
  • Article 7.3
  • Article 8
  • Article 8.1
  • Article 8.2
  • Article 8.2(b)
  • Article 8.3
  • Article 8.4
  • Article 8.6
  • Article 9
  • Article 9.4
    • Showing 1 - 3 of 3
    2026-蘑菇视频AT-1622, Gwendolyn Linnea Roeske

    The 蘑菇视频AT held that the issues on appeal were whether the 蘑菇视频DT erred in finding the application not receivable for failure to request management evaluation within the mandatory 60?day time limit, whether it erred in identifying the date of notification of the contested administrative decision, and whether any findings on mootness or alleged due process violations affected the outcome. It recalled that its role on appeal is limited to determining whether the 蘑菇视频DT committed an error of law, fact, or procedure resulting in an unreasonable decision.

    The 蘑菇视频AT held that the 蘑菇视频DT correctly identified...

    2024-蘑菇视频AT-1466, Fouad Moustafa El-Anani

    The 蘑菇视频AT rejected the new arguments and evidence submitted to the Appeals Tribunal for the first time that were aimed to show that Mr. El-Anani had not read the attachment of the e-mail that communicated the disciplinary sanction.

    The 蘑菇视频AT confirmed that, the two Microsoft Outlook notification records acknowledged by Mr. El-Anani indicated that the contested decision had been delivered to and read by him on 28 March 2023 and that he was therefore required to file his application with the 蘑菇视频DT by no later than 26 June 2023. Since Mr. Al-Anani did not file the application until 28 June 2023...

    2017-蘑菇视频AT-779, Abu Hweidi et al.

    Ar蘑菇视频AT held that 蘑菇视频RWA DT’s decision not to hold an oral hearing was a shortcoming since the parties had not agreed to the case being decided on the papers and the facts needed to be established by witnesses and/or further documentary evidence. On the question of bias and its possible bearing on the outcome of the selection process, 蘑菇视频AT held that 蘑菇视频RWA DT should have engaged in a thorough examination of the facts, rather than drawing an inference. 蘑菇视频AT held that the inference drawn by 蘑菇视频RWA DT, that it was realistic to conclude that not all of the posts could be filled by suitable candidates...