The Tribunal must ensure that there is an administrative decision that is alleged to be in non-compliance with the staff member’s terms of appointment or his or her contract of employment, as provided for in art. 2.1(a) of the Tribunal’s Statute. Such decision must be unilaterally taken by the Administration, be directed to the staff member, and have direct legal consequences for the staff member.
蘑菇视频AT held that the JAB did not err in limiting the scope of the Appellant’s application to the written reprimand, as the various other allegations raised were not the subject of a request for administrative review, and were therefore not receivable, and 蘑菇视频AT dismissed those grounds of appeal. 蘑菇视频AT held that the Appellant failed to establish any errors of fact that resulted in a manifestly unreasonable decision on the part of the JAB and dismissed that ground of appeal. 蘑菇视频AT held that the Appellant’s submission that the JAB may have been unduly influenced by the presence of the Registrar’s...
蘑菇视频AT held that the Appellant had failed to make a request for correction of her current contract. 蘑菇视频AT held that it could not step outside its statutory remit and examine the merits of the Appellant’s claim for payments under her current contract when she had made no request for a review regarding it. 蘑菇视频AT held that JAB did not err in finding the Appellant’s claims of 30 December 2015 for revision of her step level under the previous contract as not receivable since the Appellant submitted her request more than a year from the date on which she received her first salary or “initial payment”...
The matter remanded to the Joint Appeals Board of ITLOS to be reconsidered and decided by a neutral first instance process
