2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1600, Herv¨¦ Wamara Tibenderana
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT properly exercised its discretion in excluding the former staff member¡¯s allegations of racism within the CAF and his claim that his counsel was treated unfairly during the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT hearing, as well as in denying his request to call the investigator to testify. Nevertheless, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT concluded that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred in finding that the facts underlying the alleged misconduct had been proven by clear and convincing evidence, particularly in its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses.
Regarding V01¡¯s allegations, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT improperly explained away...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1599, Faten Hatem Al Dawoud
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the appeal was timely, as Article 11(5) of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµRWA DT Statute provides that the filing period begins upon receipt of the Arabic translation of the judgment when the application was originally submitted in Arabic. Since Ms. Al Dawoud received the Arabic version on 9 January 2025 and filed her appeal on 10 March 2025, the appeal was timely.
On the merits, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµRWA DT correctly identified the Agency¡¯s error in treating an email shared by Ms. Al Dawoud as confidential and acknowledged the harm caused by the erroneous disciplinary measure. However, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1597, Janet Efrati
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred in dismissing both applications as not receivable. Regarding the first application, Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Settlement Agreement encompassed all disciplinary sanctions imposed on 9 December 2022, including the deferment of eligibility for salary increment. Therefore, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT was wrong to conclude that the deferment was outside the scope of the Agreement and that the Agreement had been fully implemented. The application for enforcement was properly receivable.
As to the second application, Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Administration¡¯s interpretation of the Settlement...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1598, Ishtiaq Aslam
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT correctly determined that the former staff member¡¯s claims for compensation under Appendix D based on Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAMID living conditions were not receivable because he had not exhausted mandatory medical review remedies. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT reaffirmed the principle that staff members must exhaust internal remedies before resorting to litigation.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred in reviewing the merits of the x?ray machine injury claim while a medical board review was pending. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that both elements of the Appendix D claim were premature and should have been declared...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1595, Polinikis Sophocleous
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT did not err in concluding that the Administration lawfully imposed the disciplinary measure of demotion by one grade with deferment for three years of promotion eligibility and gender?sensitivity training. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT correctly applied the governing legal framework, including Staff Rule 1.2(f) and ST/SGB/2008/5, in determining that the staff member¡¯s conduct, an inappropriate remark referencing nudity and a stroking gesture, physical intimidation of a colleague, and leering at female staff, constituted sexual harassment and workplace harassment.
The...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1596, Maciej Fagasinski
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT did not err when it relied on ST/AI/20100/4/Rev.1 (Administration of Temporary Appointments) in finding that the staff member¡¯s performance evaluation was made in accordance with the procedural requirements in that Administrative Instruction. ST/AI/2021/4 (Performance Management and Development System) does not apply to Mr. Fagasinski¡¯s performance evaluation, because the aforementioned Instruction explicitly states that it does not apply to temporary appointments.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the purpose of the performance evaluation was not to reexamine whether Mr...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1594, Ismail Mahmoud Awadat
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s misconduct was established and that the disciplinary measure of separation from service, with compensation in lieu of notice and without termination indemnity, was proportionate under the Agency¡¯s regulatory framework. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT emphasized that fraud and collusive practices are considered areas of high concern and that misconduct committed by a person in a position of trust, such as a member of the Provident Fund Loans Committee, warrants a severe sanction.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµRWA...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1593, Sheldon Heron Carter
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT determined that the decision to maintain the staff member¡¯s performance rating ¡°C ¨C Partially meets expectations¡± constituted a reviewable administrative decision that had direct legal effect on his employment. It observed that under the applicable legal framework, a rating of ¡°Partially meets expectations¡± justifies a determination that a salary increment is not warranted, and that the increment shall be withheld pending the outcome of a PIP. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT considered these consequences to be disadvantageous effects resulting directly from the rating.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT also concluded that the...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1592, Deogracious Bwire Adundo
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the staff member¡¯s claims of fraudulent manipulation of his electronic leave records failed for want of proof.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred by leaving crucial factual issues unresolved, which made it impossible to determine the appeal fully. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the tables summarizing the staff member¡¯s sick leave records were not hearsay but qualified as business records entitled to a presumption of accuracy unless rebutted. However, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT was not satisfied that these records were accurate and noted unresolved inconsistencies. Accordingly, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further...
2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1591, Priscilla Ngigi
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT correctly applied the judicial review tests under Article 2(1)(b) of its Statute. It found that the facts of misconduct were established by clear and convincing evidence, including direct testimony from refugees, corroborating documentary evidence, and hearsay, and that the former staff member had solicited bribes from refugees on multiple occasions between 2010 and 2019 in exchange for assistance with resettlement and other Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµHCR services. It held that the established facts legally amounted to serious misconduct and that the sanction of dismissal was proportionate...