Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

Rule 104.3

  • Appendix B
  • Chapter IV
  • Chapter IX
  • Chapter VII
  • Chapter X
  • Chapter XI
  • Rule 1.2(h)
  • Rule 10.2
  • Rule 10.2(a)(ix)
  • Rule 10.3(a)
  • Rule 10.4(c)
  • Rule 10.4b
  • Rule 101.1
  • Rule 101.2(2)
  • Rule 101.2(a)
  • Rule 101.2(b)
  • Rule 101.2(c)
  • Rule 101.2(d)
  • Rule 101.2(g)
  • Rule 101.2(h)
  • Rule 101.4(a)
  • Rule 103.13
  • Rule 103.20
  • Rule 103.21(a)
  • Rule 103.24
  • Rule 103.24(a)
  • Rule 103.7(d)(ii)
  • Rule 103.9
  • Rule 103.9(a)
  • Rule 104.1
  • Rule 104.10
  • Rule 104.10(a)
  • Rule 104.12
  • Rule 104.12(a)
  • Rule 104.12(b)
  • Rule 104.12(b)(i)
  • Rule 104.12(b)(ii)
  • Rule 104.12(b)(iii)
  • Rule 104.13
  • Rule 104.13(a)
  • Rule 104.13(c)
  • Rule 104.14
  • Rule 104.14(a)(i)
  • Rule 104.14(h)(i)
  • Rule 104.15
  • Rule 104.15(b)(i)
  • Rule 104.3
  • Rule 104.4
  • Rule 104.4(e)
  • Rule 104.6
  • Rule 104.6(b)
  • Rule 104.7
  • Rule 104.7(a)
  • Rule 104.8
  • Rule 105
  • Rule 105.1(b)
  • Rule 105.1(b)(iii)
  • Rule 105.1(c)
  • Rule 105.2
  • Rule 105.2(a)
  • Rule 105.2(a)(i)
  • Rule 105.2(a)(ii)
  • Rule 105.2(a)(iii)b
  • Rule 105.3
  • Rule 105.3(d)
  • Rule 105.3(d)(iii)
  • Rule 106.2
  • Rule 106.2(a)
  • Rule 106.2(c)
  • Rule 106.2(g)
  • Rule 106.6
  • Rule 107
  • Rule 107.1
  • Rule 107.21
  • Rule 107.21(h)
  • Rule 107.27
  • Rule 107.28
  • Rule 107.28(c)
  • Rule 107.4(b)
  • Rule 107.6
  • Rule 108.1
  • Rule 108.2
  • Rule 109.1
  • Rule 109.1(b)
  • Rule 109.1(c)
  • Rule 109.1(c)(i)
  • Rule 109.1(c)(ii)(a)
  • Rule 109.15
  • Rule 109.3
  • Rule 109.5(h)
  • Rule 109.7
  • Rule 109.7(a)
  • Rule 109.8
  • Rule 11.2
  • Rule 11.2(c)
  • Rule 110.1
  • Rule 110.2
  • Rule 110.2(a)
  • Rule 110.3
  • Rule 110.3(a)
  • Rule 110.3(a)(i)
  • Rule 110.3(a)(iv)
  • Rule 110.3(a)(viii)
  • Rule 110.3(b)
  • Rule 110.3(b)(i)
  • Rule 110.3(vii)
  • Rule 110.4
  • Rule 110.4(a)
  • Rule 110.4(c)
  • Rule 110.7
  • Rule 110.7(b)
  • Rule 111
  • Rule 111.1
  • Rule 111.2
  • Rule 111.2(a)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(f)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(i)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(i)(ii)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(ii)
  • Rule 111.2(c)
  • Rule 111.2(c)(iii)
  • Rule 111.2(e)
  • Rule 111.2(f)
  • Rule 111.2(p)
  • Rule 111.2(q)
  • Rule 111.4(b)
  • Rule 112.2
  • Rule 112.2(a)
  • Rule 112.2(b)
  • Rule 112.2(f)
  • Rule 112.3
  • Rule 112.7
  • Rule 200.2(b)
  • Rule 204.3
  • Rule 204.3(d)
  • Rule 205.3(a)(iii)
  • Rule 208.5(a)
  • Rule 209.2(a)
  • Rule 209.2(c)
  • Rule 209.5
  • Rule 3
  • Rule 3.13(a)(iii)
  • Rule 3.17(c)(ii)
  • Rule 301.1
  • Rule 301.3
  • Rule 301.3(d)
  • Rule 301.3(q)(ii)
  • Rule 301.4
  • Rule 304.1
  • Rule 304.3
  • Rule 304.4
  • Rule 304.4(a)
  • Rule 304.4(b)
  • Rule 304(a)
  • Rule 309.2
  • Rule 309.3
  • Rule 309.4
  • Rule 309.5(a)
  • Rule 309.5(b)
  • Rule 310.1
  • Rule 310.1(e)(ii)
  • Rule 310.1(e)(iv)
  • Rule 311.1
  • Rule 312.6
  • Rule 4.17
  • Rule 4.4(b)
  • Rule 5.3
    • Showing 1 - 5 of 5
    2014-Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT-396, Robineau

    Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was persuaded for reasons of equity and good faith by the Appellant¡¯s arguments rather than those put forward by the Secretary-General, although it did not accept the entirety of the Appellant¡¯s arguments on the discontinuation issue. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that in failing to give due consideration to the arguments raised by the Appellant regarding the years 1989 to 1997, Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in law in retroactively applying former Staff Rule 104. 3 set forth in ST/SGB/2003/1 to the entirety of his service. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Appellant was entitled to rely on the statutory provisions in force when he last...

    2015-Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT-570, Hajdari

    Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that resignation results in a break in service, which may, in turn, disqualify a staff member for consideration for a permanent appointment. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that if a staff member took issue with the requirement for a break in service, he or she should have challenged it at the time by requesting management evaluation. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Mr Hajdari never challenged his separation from service from Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵMIK or, at any time after his arrival in New York, made any request to human resources to be reinstated at the time. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Mr Hajdari¡¯s...

    2019-Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT-906, Omwanda

    Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT exceeded its competence in reviewing Mr Omwanda¡¯s EOD date, as it was not subject to a timely request for management evaluation. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Mr Omwanda knew or ought to have known from his Letter of Appointment the date from which his appointment was effective, that he had been re-employed, not reinstated, and that its terms applied regardless of any period of former service. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT was statutorily barred from hearing Mr Omwanda¡¯s application. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT upheld the appeal and vacated the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT judgment.

    Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2012/009, Checa-Meedan

    Outcome: The application was rejected. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT found that the Applicant failed to establish a factual basis for her alleged expectation that her contract would be renewed, that she would be given a regularized position, or that she would be placed on special leave without pay at the expiry of her contract. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT therefore found that the decision not to renew the Applicant¡¯s temporary appointment was not unlawful.

    Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2013/143, Carrabregu

    She alleged that the Administration advised her wrongly to resign from her 100-series fixed-term appointment (FTA) with Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDP, Kosovo, in 2007, when she was offered a FTA with Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵV, Bonn, and argued that her resignation cannot be taken into account when assessing her eligibility for consideration for conversion, namely the requirement of 5-year continuous service. Following requests for additional information, the Tribunal found that the Administration put the Applicant into an illegal situation when she was first offered a 300-series appointment of limited duration with Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵV, Bonn, while she...