2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1536, Milunka Tadic
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Administration¡¯s restructuring of the finance function was a genuine exercise and a proper use of the Administration¡¯s discretion in responding to evolving needs. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT did not agree that the Administration acted unfairly or unjustly in abolishing the former staff member¡¯s post. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further held that consultation with the former staff member was not required prior to the abolition of her post.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the former staff member¡¯s dissatisfaction with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT¡¯s assessment of the evidence of workplace issues between her and her supervisor does not...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1534-Corr.1, Dionette Pino Genayas
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that months after the death of the participant in the Fund, the Appellant had produced Pens.A/2 forms purporting to change the designation of the beneficiary of the residual settlement, executed by a thumbprint and not the participant¡¯s signature. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT also noted the medical evidence of signs of the participant¡¯s dementia.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Appellant had provided no evidence to support the contention that the participant¡¯s mental capacity had improved by the time of thumbprinting the later forms. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Fund had not erred when it found those forms...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1529, Olexandr Maruschak
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had erred by failing to grant the remedy under Article 10(5)(a) of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Statute after it had found that the disciplinary decision was unlawful. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred by refusing to rescind the contested decision on the grounds that the staff member had abused the judicial process. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT remanded the case to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT for determination of the appropriate remedy.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT agreed with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT that the former staff member had manifestly abused the judicial process by filing forged documents before that Tribunal. However, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had erred in the...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1530, Leonid Dolgopolov
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the staff member bore the burden of proving that the Secretary-General¡¯s failures to address both the discriminatory policies of the host country and the alleged attempt of the law enforcement authorities of that host country to recruit him, constituted unilateral decisions taken by the Administration, which applied to him individually, and had direct legal consequences on his terms of appointment or contract of employment. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the staff member could not meet this burden because these issues fell within the realm of diplomacy, are subject to the rules of...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2025/019, Oppal
Having reviewed the parties¡¯ submissions and the evidence on record, the Tribunal defined the issues for determination as follows:
a. Whether the Applicant had a realistic chance of being selected; and
b. Whether the Applicant suffered any financial loss due to the contested decision.
Regarding the first issue, the Tribunal noted that the Management Evaluation Unit had already determined that there were irregularities in the selection process and recommended that the selection exercise be redone. The Under Secretary-General for Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance (USG/DMSPC) had also...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1527, BK
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that the staff member had a medical condition requiring attention which impacted his ability to return to work, and he had consented to the Independent Medical Examination and had not challenged those records before the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT nor on appeal.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that even if ST/AI/2019/1 were applicable to Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµHCR staff members or taken as a model of just practice, it would not have rendered the Independent Medical Examination improper.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found no basis to overturn the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT¡¯s determination that there had been no evidence of bias or conflict of interest in either the medical...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1526, BK
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that the impugned Orders denying the staff member¡¯s requests for anonymity had been issued less than a month after the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had granted his motion for anonymity in another case.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the impugned Orders did not exist in isolation and the interaction of all these proceedings rendered the situation exceptional. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that denying him anonymity for his two applications alone would defeat the purpose of anonymity and, in the unique circumstances of these proceedings, this inconsistency was prejudicial to the integrity of the internal justice system. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1528, John Njuguna Bernard
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the application for revision must fail since no new and decisive fact has been shown to exist that was unknown to Mr. Bernard and the Appeals Tribunal when the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Judgment was made which would have materially impacted the outcome of said Judgment
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1523, Madhumita Hosali
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT expressed serious concern about the lack of a sufficient record of reasons supporting the choice of the selected candidate over the staff member at the time of the contested decision.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that gender and geographical considerations were unevenly applied in the selection exercise, positively assessing the British male while ignoring or discounting that the staff member was an Indian female. Contrary to Staff Regulation 4.4, in which the fullest regard should be given to internal candidates, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that her Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµ experience was used to disadvantage her. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT also...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2025/018, Peter Stockholder
In the present case, according to the Applicant¡¯s own submissions, he was not in a situation of ¡°an absolute impossibility¡± of filing a timely waiver as per Karki. Instead, while apparently being aware of expiry of the deadline, he continued to work intensely on preparing the application, and rather than giving priority to filing it in time, he instead wanted it ¡°to be perfect¡±. When then filing the application, the Applicant, however, made no reference to it being filed too late or indicating that he requested a waiver of the 90-day deadline under art. 8.3 of the Statute. He only requested a...