2015-Ģ��ƵAT-550

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that the evidence against the Appellant uncovered by the investigation was so overwhelming that the only reasonable conclusion available to Ģ��ƵDT was that the facts were established by clear and convincing evidence. Noting that the evidence that he was in possession of the stolen card and that he used it to refuel his own private vehicle was not contested by the Appellant, Ģ��ƵAT held that his explanation of how he came into possession of the stolen card and how he came to use it was incapable of belief. Ģ��ƵAT agreed with the finding of Ģ��ƵDT that the established facts amounted to serious misconduct. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant violated his obligation to uphold the highest standard of integrity and that, since Ģ��ƵDT properly found that the facts amounting to misconduct were established, the Administration had shown serious misconduct on the part of the Appellant. Ģ��ƵAT agreed with the Ģ��ƵDT��s finding that the sanction was proportionate. Noting that the Administration did not impose the most severe sanction of summary dismissal, Ģ��ƵAT held that the lesser sanction of separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice and without termination indemnity should be upheld. Ģ��ƵAT held that there was no evidence that the Appellant��s rights were infringed in any way during the investigation and Ģ��ƵAT agreed with Ģ��ƵDT��s finding that there was no merit in the Appellant��s argument that the investigation was procedurally defective. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT��s failure to specifically refer to the closing statement did not have any effect on the outcome of the case, as those arguments were without merit. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant, while raising several claims of procedural error by Ģ��ƵDT, failed to demonstrate how the alleged errors prejudiced him or violated his due process rights. Ģ��ƵAT held that, even assuming, arguendo, that such errors occurred, none of them would be a ground to reverse the Ģ��ƵDT judgment. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant failed to meet his obligation of satisfying Ģ��ƵAT that the judgment was defective in that he failed to establish any errors of law, fact or procedure warranting a reversal of the judgment. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested his separation from service for misconduct in the form of misappropriating a duty-free gasoline card and using it to refuel his private vehicle. Ģ��ƵDT dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

It is not necessary for any court, whether a trial or appellate court, to address each and every claim made by a litigant, especially when a claim has no merit.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

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

Mizyed

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement