2024-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1471, Fouzia Rizqy
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found no error in the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT¡¯s reliance on the communication between the staff member and her attorney when it established that she had submitted false information in her claims for reimbursement for medical expenses. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that her attorney had voluntarily submitted the privileged document as an attachment to her application. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT observed that she had not imposed any limitations or reservations on the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT¡¯s use of the document and had referred to it on multiple occasions in the course of the proceedings. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT agreed that she had waived her right to confidentiality...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2024/048, Hannina
The Tribunal found that the decision to place the Applicant on ALWP was lawful, reasonable and proportionate, and that the SRSG reasonably exercised his authority to protect the work of the fact-finding panel (pursuant to sec. 11.3(b) of ST/AI/2017/1) and to avoid any prejudice to the interests and reputation of the Organization (pursuant to sec. 11.3(c) of ST/AI/2017/1). The Applicant failed to discharge the burden of establishing that the contested decision was arbitrary or capricious, motivated by prejudice or other extraneous factors, or was flawed by procedural irregularity or error of...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2024/049, Oketch
The Applicant failed to establish through clear and convincing evidence that the selection process for the Post was tainted by any unlawful actions or that he suffered any harm as a result of the contested decision. Accordingly, his application was dismissed and his claim for compensation was rejected.
The assertion that the Applicant had a reasonable expectation that his candidacy would receive special consideration since he had performed the functions of the Post for five years was misplaced. He did not seriously dispute the fact that the creation of the Head of Office position was not a...
090 (GVA/2024), Samuel De Jaegere
- Appealed
The Tribunal acknowledges the Applicant¡¯s circumstances and has no intention of jeopardizing his health in any way. At the same time, it considers the Applicant¡¯s active participation in the proceedings essential to ensuring the fair adjudication of his case. The Tribunal concurs with the Respondent¡¯s assertion that ¡°the right to institute and pursue legal proceedings is contingent upon the individual exercising this right having a legitimate interest in initiating and sustaining legal action.¡± The Applicant voluntarily initiated these judicial proceedings and, as such, has a vested interest...
2024-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1468, Louis Savadogo
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT considered the central tenet of the staff member¡¯s case, which was that he held the necessary academic qualifications for the role, but that the selected candidate did not. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT concluded that the educational specifications in the job vacancy announcement were a minimum threshold, but not the determining factor in the selection. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that both the staff member and the selected candidate met the threshold academic qualifications, even though they obtained them by different means. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT rejected the claim that the ITLOS should not have taken into account that the...
2024-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1467, Qasem Qasem
The Appeals Tribunal found, in relation to Mr. Qasem¡¯s exclusion from consideration for the Acting Head position, that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµRWA DT erred in finding Mr. Qasem¡¯s application not receivable. The Appeals Tribunal however found that in the circumstances of this case, it was in the interest of judicial economy to review the case on the merits without remand. The Appeals Tribunal found that while the Administration had unlawfully excluded Mr. Qasem¡¯s application from consideration, this irregularity had no impact on the selection decision. Considering Mr. Qasem¡¯s performance, administrative and...
2024-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1469, Parmosivea Soobrayan
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT observed that the Secretary-General elected to limit the scope of his appeal only against the findings of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT with respect to two of nine instances of alleged misconduct by the former staff member. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further acknowledged that the Secretary-General¡¯s contention was that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred in law when it applied the legal tests for harassment and sexual harassment to the two incidents.
Nonetheless, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that to determine the issue on appeal required more than simply an application of the correct legal test. To reach any conclusions requires more than simply regard to...
2024-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1469-Corr.1, Parmosivea Soobrayan
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT observed that the Secretary-General elected to limit the scope of his appeal only against the findings of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT with respect to two of nine instances of alleged misconduct by the former staff member. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further acknowledged that the Secretary-General¡¯s contention was that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred in law when it applied the legal tests for harassment and sexual harassment to the two incidents.
Nonetheless, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that to determine the issue on appeal required more than simply an application of the correct legal test. To reach any conclusions requires more than simply regard to...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2024/047, Argyrou
The Tribunal noted that the Applicant¡¯s challenges/complaints did not derive from one clear administrative decision. The first challenge was addressed to an alleged failure by the Administration to fully comply with sec. 2.4 ST/AI/1998/9 (System for the classification of posts). The second one was based on the Applicant¡¯s apparent assumption that he should have been upgraded/promoted to GS-7 level after the upward reclassification of the post he was encumbering.
As a result, the Tribunal interpreted the application as a whole to determine exactly the starting point of the Applicant¡¯s...
2024-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1466, Fouad Moustafa El-Anani
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT rejected the new arguments and evidence submitted to the Appeals Tribunal for the first time that were aimed to show that Mr. El-Anani had not read the attachment of the e-mail that communicated the disciplinary sanction.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT confirmed that, the two Microsoft Outlook notification records acknowledged by Mr. El-Anani indicated that the contested decision had been delivered to and read by him on 28 March 2023 and that he was therefore required to file his application with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT by no later than 26 June 2023. Since Mr. Al-Anani did not file the application until 28 June 2023...