罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT Statute | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-371, Brisson

17 Oct 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT noted that there had been a policy change in 1997 which meant that staff members who requested pension as a result of an accident suffered in the service of the Organisation post-1997 were granted it with the proviso that it would only be paid until they retired. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that, as the Appellant＊s accident occurred long after the policy change in 1997, the changed policy was applicable. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that as the Appellant had reached retirement age at the time of the incapacitating injury, his appeal had to be dismissed. 罌厭弝ⅰAT dismissed the appeal.

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-369, Darwish

17 Oct 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT affirmed the 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT decision that the application was not receivable as consistent with 罌厭弝ⅰRWA Area Staff Rule 111. 2 and Article 8 of the 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT Statute. On alleged errors in procedure, 罌厭弝ⅰAT noted that the Appellant had no opportunity to challenge the untimeliness of the Commissioner-General＊s reply before 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT, but that, since the Appellant had not demonstrated how the untimely reply affected 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT＊s decision on receivability, 罌厭弝ⅰAT found no merit on this ground. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that there was no error in 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT＊s reasoning on the issue of EVR. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that, absent an appealable...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-363, Chaaban

17 Oct 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT held there was no error in the 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT＊s finding that the application was time-barred. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT has, in principle, the discretion to accept 罌厭弝ⅰRWA＊s late reply in circumstances where 罌厭弝ⅰRWA has not filed a motion seeking leave to do so and without proprio motu ordering 罌厭弝ⅰRWA to file a reply. Noting the Administration＊s reply was due before the transitional period into the new system of justice began, 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT erred when it granted a waiver of time after an excessive period of time had passed which was based on inaccurate facts and an invalid reason. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-311, Pirnea

28 Mar 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the reasons proffered by the Administration for not renewing Mr Pirnea＊s appointment were valid, namely that he could no longer perform his functions in Somalia since his life was at risk there. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the 罌厭弝ⅰDT＊s conclusion that the Administration had hidden reasons for not renewing Mr Pirnea＊s appointment was based solely on speculation and that 罌厭弝ⅰDT erred on a question of law and fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision when it concluded that there was no valid reason for the non-renewal. 罌厭弝ⅰAT noted that...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-304, Al Surkhi et al.

28 Mar 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the relevant Circular contained all the necessary components to give rise to legal consequences for the striking staff and that it had individual application. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT committed no legal error when it decided that the relevant administrative decision for the purpose of former Area Staff Rule 111.3 was the decision communicated by way of the Circular and that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT correctly determined the terminus a quo for the purpose of computing the time for requesting administrative review. 罌厭弝ⅰAT upheld the 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT＊s determination as to the limits of its jurisdiction. 罌厭弝ⅰAT...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-292, Abu Jarbou

28 Mar 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT held that it was a procedural error to allow the Commissioner-General to participate in the proceedings and to file a late reply without a written order, but that the Appellant was not prejudiced by that error and the error did not violate his due process rights. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the Appellant＊s failure to object to the Respondent＊s late reply before 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT did not prevent him from raising on appeal the question of procedural error. On the Appellant＊s claim that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT erred when it did not permit him to file a rejoinder to the Respondent＊s reply, 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that since the Appellant did...

2014-罌厭弝ⅰAT-433-Corr.1, Hersh

27 Jun 2014

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT had correctly stated that even if it could be argued that the profile of the Broadcast Technology Officer (BTO P-4) post had changed due to the drafting of new Terms of Reference (TOR) by Ms Hermann, the only viable course of action in the circumstances for the purposes of filling it would have been a regular, competitive selection process and not a comparative review as happened in this case. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT was correct in finding that the so-called comparative review between Ms Hersh and Mr Tobgyal for the only post...

2014-罌厭弝ⅰAT-433/Corr.1, Hersh

27 Jun 2014

2014-罌厭弝ⅰAT-442, El-Khalek

27 Jun 2014

罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT considered an appeal by the Commissioner-General. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT did not err in fact or in law such as to vitiate its judgment, except with regards to the award of compensation. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰRWA DT did not overstep its role to judicially review the administrative decision imposing a disciplinary measure on the staff member and terminating his appointment. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the Administration had failed to demonstrate that the staff member had committed the serious misconduct he had been charged with, because not only did the proceedings fail to provide him with an adequate...

2014-罌厭弝ⅰAT-433, Hersh

27 Jun 2014