蘑菇视频

Article 9.4

  • 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
    2011-蘑菇视频AT-107, Chen

    蘑菇视频AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Ms Chen. 蘑菇视频AT held that the principle that everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work (Article 23(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) applies to 蘑菇视频 staff. 蘑菇视频AT held that budgetary considerations could not trump the requirement of equal treatment. 蘑菇视频AT declined to grant the relief sought by Ms Chen in her cross-appeal on the basis that 蘑菇视频DT awarded damages from the correct date. 蘑菇视频AT held that the Administration’s allegation that 蘑菇视频DT usurped the Secretary-General’s...

    2018-蘑菇视频AT-889, Sall

    蘑菇视频AT considered the appeal of the Appellant and the cross-appeal of the Secretary-General. 蘑菇视频AT denied the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing, noting that it would not have added any further value or clarification of the factual and legal issues. 蘑菇视频AT held that the Secretary-General's cross-appeal was receivable, according to Article 9(4) of the RoP. 蘑菇视频AT held that the 蘑菇视频DT erred in holding that the disciplinary investigation was flawed by procedural irregularities. 蘑菇视频AT held that 蘑菇视频DT erred in finding that the disciplinary decision was unlawful and, accordingly, that there could neither...

    2021-蘑菇视频AT-1134, Anis Basil AlMousa

    蘑菇视频AT considered an appeal of the Judgment on the merits and a cross-appeal from the Commissioner-General on the receivability finding. 蘑菇视频AT held that the cross-appeal was receivable, however 蘑菇视频AT dismissed it in light of the Commissioner-General’s request that his cross-appeal not be examined should the appeal be dismissed and secondly, because 蘑菇视频AT did not detect any error in the 蘑菇视频RWA DT’s order which found that the application was receivable. On the merits of the appeal, 蘑菇视频AT held that Mr. AlMousa failed to establish any error in the 蘑菇视频RWA DT Judgment, although his appeal undoubtedly...