Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2023/140, Maruschak
After consulting the Staff Regulations and Rules and the Respondent¡¯s submissions, the Tribunal has found nothing to contradict the Applicant that the breathalyzer test was conducted illegally.
The Tribunal will not accept evidence obtained in violation of the Staff Regulations and Rules.
The Tribunal finds that the Respondent has failed to discharge his burden of proof to show by clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant drove his vehicle after consuming alcohol.
The evidence is clear that the Respondent¡¯s argument that a Military Officer was authorized to conduct a breathalyzer...
2023-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1406, Kamal Karki
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT denied the Appellant¡¯s request for anonymity as the issue presented in his appeal was purely procedural and jurisdictional and did not involve any personal data which had to be protected.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT also denied the Appellant¡¯s request for an oral hearing, finding that that it would not assist the Appeals Tribunal in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that because the Appellant filed his application 93 days after the receipt of the contested administrative decision, it was not receivable, absent waiver of the deadline of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT observed that given...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2023/139, Mouchabek
The Applicant having failed to establish any illegality, procedural irregularity, bad faith or improper motivation in the Respondent¡¯s taking of the decision not to accept her request to withdraw her resignation, the application had to fail.
Had the Respondent not exercised his discretion to reject the Applicant¡¯s request to withdraw her resignation, he would have been compelled to rescind selection decisions already communicated and accepted by three other staff members. This would have constituted a breach of the employment contracts of the three staff members. This breach would have...
2023-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1405, Yonas Negasa
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the administration of the written security affairs exam in the present case had not met the minimum standards detailed in Chhikara. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that the Administration had first administered the test, analyzed the results, and only then had decided that certain questions should be eliminated from consideration. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the unannounced and ex post deletion of questions from the written examination, after it had already been marked, on its very face violated the obligation to administer the test in a...
2023-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1404 , Alan George Blythe
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT considered an appeal by the staff member.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the recommendation report did not provide any explanation to understand the rationale of the non-selection decision. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that no information had been given in the course of the judicial proceedings either as to why the external candidate was the most suitable candidate. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that, for the sake of reasonableness, fairness and transparency, it was expected from the Administration to give relevant and true reasons supporting its ultimate choice. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had made an error of fact...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2023/138, Almoghayer
The Tribunal found unsubstantiated the alleged procecural and substantive irregularities in the lateral transfer of the Applicant to the position of CEO of GPH. The Applicant was well aware of both his lateral transfer and the business model of Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµITAR, which is dependent on external funding. Also, the Applicant's letter of appointment clearly stated that his appointment was limited to availability of funds.
Moreover, the Applicant argued that, instead of being placed on SWLOP until the end of his temporary appointment, his contract should have been terminated, pursuant to para. 9(c) of AC...
2023-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1403, Francis N. Fultang
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the absence of a case management discussion and an oral hearing before the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT was not a procedural error.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT did not err in admitting and considering the memorandum of allegations of misconduct, as it was used by the Administration only to verify that circumstances warranting the placement of the Appellant on ALWP occurred. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT also found that the OIOS Investigation Report did not refer to the communications between the Appellant and his counsel, nor to exchanges during a mediation process, but only considered the Appellant¡¯s objective...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2023/136, Koura
The Applicant failed to convince the Tribunal that the Administration raised in him a legitimate expectation of renewal of his FTA. An erroneously raised personnel action without a written contract does not constitute a ground for legitimate expectation of renewal.
The Tribunal agreed with the Applicant that the Staff Regulations and Rules must be applied uniformly and consistently to staff members. United Nations procedures exist to facilitate fair and transparent substantive decisions, and the failure to abide by required procedures is no mere ¡°technicality¡±, but instead undermines...
2023-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1401, Mo?se Alain Nkoyock (Fils)
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT made several errors of law and of fact leading to a manifestly unreasonable outcome.
In particular, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT erred in refusing to hold a hearing of evidence that Mr. Nkoyock sought to call to establish his defence to the allegations against him and to impeach the Secretary-General¡¯s witnesses. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT further erred when it failed to reach its own conclusions on disputed facts and relied overly on the internal investigation¡¯s findings. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT also erred in relying on evidence that it had ruled irrelevant and inadmissible...
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT/2023/137, Naeem
The Tribunal recalled that receivability is a condition sine qua non for judicial review.
The Tribunal noted that by the time the Applicant filed his application, he had not been formally notified of the abolition of his post and the restructuring exercise was still ongoing. Up to the date of the judgment¡¯s issuance, the situation remained the same as showed by a November 2023 email from Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDP to the Applicant asking him to confirm his interest in the position of Programme Assistant at the G-5 level. So far, the Applicant is still serving at the G-6 level in Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDP Pakistan.
The Tribunal...