2010-Ģ��ƵAT-040

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT preliminarily held that the appeal should be regarded as timely because the initial submission in Arabic was received within the prescribed time limit. Ģ��ƵAT noted that the fact-finding committee acted in an objective and responsible manner in conducting its investigation and assessing the charges. Ģ��ƵAT noted that there was clear and convincing evidence supporting a finding of misconduct, which was not successfully rebutted by the Appellant, which alone was a sufficient basis for the impugned decision. Given the established misconduct and the seriousness of the incident, Ģ��ƵAT held that it could not review the level of sanction imposed; such a decision, which falls within the remit of the Commissioner-General, could only be reviewed by Ģ��ƵAT in cases of obvious absurdity or flagrant arbitrariness, which was not established here. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Commissioner-General's decision.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Ģ��ƵRWA decision: The Applicant contested the decision to terminate his appointment on the grounds of misconduct for sexually molesting a young girl. The Ģ��ƵRWA JAB recommended that the termination decision be reviewed. The Commissioner-General rejected the recommendation and dismissed the appeal.

Legal Principle(s)

The establishment of misconduct alone can be a sufficient basis for a staff member��s termination. Depending on the establishment of misconduct and seriousness of incidents, certain cases can only be reviewed by Ģ��ƵAT in cases of obvious absurdity or flagrant arbitrariness.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered; No relief ordered

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants

Aqel

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement