Suspension of action / interim measures | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2012-罌厭弝ⅰAT-255, Igunda

1 Nov 2012

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered an appeal against 罌厭弝ⅰDT Orders No. 082 (NBI/2011) and No. 083 (NBI/2011) by the Secretary-General. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the main motivation for ordering the suspension of action in Order No. 82 was to grant access to justice to the staff member and that the Order could be sustained because a certain degree of discretion had to be awarded to 罌厭弝ⅰDT to consider and resolve urgent matters such as interim measures. On Order No. 83, which extended the suspension of action until 12 August 2011, in breach of the five working days restrictive period to render the decision, 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-324, El-Komy

31 Jul 2014

罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the exclusion of the right to appeal a decision to suspend the execution of an administrative decision constitutes an exception to the general principle of the right to appeal and must, therefore, be narrowly interpreted; 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the exception applied only to jurisdictional decisions ordering the suspension of an administrative decision pending management evaluation. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that no jurisdictional decision, which, as in matter before it, ordered the suspension of a contested administrative decision for a period beyond the date on which the management evaluation was...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-330, Nwuke

28 Jun 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered two appeals, one against Order No. 103 (NBI/2012) and one against judgment No. 罌厭弝ⅰDT/2012/116. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the Appellant had not established any excess of jurisdiction or competence on the part of 罌厭弝ⅰDT; rather, his claims addressed the merits of the 罌厭弝ⅰDT decision. 罌厭弝ⅰAT noted that even if the 罌厭弝ⅰDT had erred in law or fact and as also alleged in the case, committed an error of procedure, this did not instance any excess of jurisdiction or competence on its part such as would entitle the Appellant to bypass the exception to the right to appeal set out in Article 2(2) of the 罌厭弝ⅰDT...

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-327, Tiwathia

28 Jun 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT noted that appeals from 罌厭弝ⅰDT decisions on suspensions of action will only be receivable if 罌厭弝ⅰDT, in adjudicating such applications, exceeded its competence or jurisdiction. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the 罌厭弝ⅰDT＊s legal and factual reasoning fell entirely within its competence and jurisdiction. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that, although the Appellant＊s claims addressed the merits of the 罌厭弝ⅰDT judgment, they did not amount to claims that the 罌厭弝ⅰDT exceeded its competence or jurisdiction. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the appeal was not receivable. 罌厭弝ⅰDT dismissed the appeal.

2013-罌厭弝ⅰAT-314, Mpacko

28 Mar 2013

罌厭弝ⅰAT held that Ms Mpacko＊s claims addressed the merits of the 罌厭弝ⅰDT decision and did not amount to claims that the 罌厭弝ⅰDT exceeded its competence or jurisdiction in denying her application for suspension of action. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT did not exceed its competence or jurisdiction in denying Ms Mpacko＊s application for suspension of action. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the appeal was not receivable.

2014-罌厭弝ⅰAT-481, Lee

17 Oct 2014

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered appeals of Order Nos. 182 (GVA/2013), 183 (GVA/2013), and 199 (GVA/2013), and Summary judgment No. 罌厭弝ⅰDT/2013/147. As a preliminary matter, 罌厭弝ⅰAT denied the Appellant＊s requests for oral proceedings, confidentiality, to file additional proceedings, to file additional documentary evidence, and to order production of documents. With respect to Orders Nos. 182, 183 and 199, 罌厭弝ⅰAT found that 罌厭弝ⅰDT did not exceed its competence or jurisdiction in issuing these orders and in denying the Appellant＊s applications to suspend action. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the appeals of these Orders were not...

2014-罌厭弝ⅰAT-410, Igbinedion

2 Apr 2014

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT did not act lawfully in issuing an order in direct contravention of the established 罌厭弝ⅰAT jurisprudence. However, 罌厭弝ⅰAT also held that parties before 罌厭弝ⅰDT must obey its binding decisions and that a decision by 罌厭弝ⅰDT remained legally valid until such time as 罌厭弝ⅰAT vacated it. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the Secretary-General＊s refusal to comply with 罌厭弝ⅰDT＊s order was vexatious. 罌厭弝ⅰAT reiterated its jurisprudence that the absence of compliance may merit contempt proceedings. 罌厭弝ⅰAT upheld the appeal in part.

Accountability Referral: The 罌厭弝ⅰAT...

2016-罌厭弝ⅰAT-709, Wilson

28 Oct 2016

罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the impugned Order ceased to have any legal effect when the respective management evaluation was issued. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the issuance of the management evaluation had rendered the Order under appeal moot. 罌厭弝ⅰAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 罌厭弝ⅰDT judgment.

2016-罌厭弝ⅰAT-708, Finniss

28 Oct 2016

罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the impugned Order ceased to have any legal effect when the management evaluation decision was issued. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the issuance of the management evaluation had rendered the Order under appeal moot. 罌厭弝ⅰAT dismissed the appeal in its entirety.

2020-罌厭弝ⅰAT-998, Barud

27 Mar 2020

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered an appeal of 罌厭弝ⅰDT Order No. 087 by Ms Barud. 罌厭弝ⅰAT dismissed her motion to admit additional documents related to the substantive issue of justification for the non-renewal of her contract, due to their lack of relevance to the matter for decision by 罌厭弝ⅰAT on her application for a suspension of action. 罌厭弝ⅰAT noted that there was no reason why these documents could not be used by Ms Barud for the substantive matter, which was, at that time, before 罌厭弝ⅰDT. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the appeal failed on the grounds that Ms Barud did not apply for a suspension within the statutory time limit. In...