Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

Le TANU a examin¨¦ si l'appel interlocutoire ¨¦tait recevable parce qu'ABA n'avait pas eu l'occasion d'¨ºtre entendue sur la question des mesures de protection pour V01 lors de l'audience propos¨¦e au moment o¨´ le TNDU a rendu la premi¨¨re ordonnance. Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'il ne s'agissait pas d'un motif pour faire droit ¨¤ l'appel interlocutoire, car les arguments d'ABA avaient ¨¦t¨¦ entendus par le TANU lorsqu'il avait d¨¦pos¨¦ sa demande de r¨¦examen.

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le TANU n'avait pas outrepass¨¦ ses comp¨¦tences ou sa juridiction lorsqu'il a ¨¦mis ces ordonnances de gestion des dossiers. Le TANU n...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT considered whether the interlocutory appeal was receivable because ABA had not been given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of the protective measures for V01 at the proposed hearing at the time the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT issued the first Order. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that this was not grounds to grant the interlocutory appeal, because ABA¡¯s arguments were heard by the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT when he filed his motion for reconsideration.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not exceed its competence or jurisdiction when it issued these case management orders. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was also not persuaded by ABA¡¯s argument that the violation...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que le changement de titre de l'ancienne fonctionnaire ¨¤ la suite d'un reclassement n'¨¦quivalait pas ¨¤ une abolition ou ¨¤ une suppression de son poste, ce qui rendait son licenciement ill¨¦gal.

Le TANU a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en accordant ¨¤ l'ancienne fonctionnaire une compensation en lieu et place de deux ann¨¦es de salaire de base net. ? cet ¨¦gard, le TANU a soulign¨¦ que le Tribunal avait correctement pris en compte le fait que l'engagement permanent de l'ancienne fonctionnaire...

Le TANU a rejet¨¦ les nouveaux ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve pr¨¦sent¨¦s pour la premi¨¨re fois en appel, qui visaient ¨¤ justifier l'introduction tardive de l'affaire en l'attribuant ¨¤ la situation personnelle de l'avocat du requ¨¦rant.

Le TANU est d'avis que les membres du personnel doivent g¨¦n¨¦ralement respecter les d¨¦lais fix¨¦s. Toutefois, en l'esp¨¨ce, le TANU a estim¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait commis une erreur de fait et de droit en rejetant la demande de M. Khan au motif qu'elle n'¨¦tait pas recevable ratione temporis. Il a conclu que les circonstances exceptionnelles de M. Khan - notamment de graves inondations...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que la d¨¦cision de ne pas s¨¦lectionner l'agent pour le TJO 161651 ¨¦tait l¨¦gale. Il a estim¨¦ qu'¨¦tant donn¨¦ que l'agent n'avait pas contest¨¦ l'annulation du TJO 14924, en vertu duquel l'administration avait initialement publi¨¦ le poste d'agent administratif, cette d¨¦cision d'annulation ne faisait pas partie de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e faisant l'objet de l'examen. En tout ¨¦tat de cause, le TANU a d¨¦termin¨¦ que l'administration avait le pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire d'annuler le TJO 149241 et de publier ¨¤ nouveau le poste sous le TJO 161651 apr¨¨s que la candidate s¨¦lectionn¨¦e ait retir¨¦...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA avait identifi¨¦ ¨¤ juste titre que la norme de preuve pour placer l'agent en ALWOP ¨¦tait qu'il y ait des soup?ons raisonnables ou des motifs raisonnables de croire que l'agent avait commis la faute all¨¦gu¨¦e.

Le TANU a rejet¨¦ l'argument de l'agent selon lequel le retrait par son ex-femme de la plainte d¨¦pos¨¦e contre lui devant une juridiction nationale aurait d? mettre un terme ¨¤ toutes les enqu¨ºtes men¨¦es ¨¤ son encontre. Le TANU a not¨¦ que le tribunal national avait fourni les dossiers de l'affaire ¨¤ l'Agence et que celle-ci, apr¨¨s une ¨¦valuation compl¨¨te...

Le TANU a confirm¨¦ la d¨¦termination par le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA des chances de s¨¦lection de l'ancien membre du personnel pour le poste ¨¤ un quart pour des raisons alternatives. Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA avait correctement pris en compte la possibilit¨¦ que l'Office ait pu pr¨¦senter d'autres candidats sur une base d'¨¦quivalence lors d'un second examen apr¨¨s la phase de pr¨¦s¨¦lection. En particulier, le Tribunal arbitral de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA a estim¨¦ que, ¨¦tant donn¨¦ que le nombre suffisant de candidats pour un exercice de mise en concurrence se situe normalement entre trois et cinq candidats par poste...

e Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que le TNDU avait correctement jug¨¦ que le BSR avait toute latitude pour faire des commentaires sur les performances de Mme Abdellaoui, que les commentaires contest¨¦s du BSR ¨¦taient raisonnables et ¨¦quilibr¨¦s par d'autres commentaires qui fournissaient une perspective positive ¨¤ l'appui de l'¨¦valuation globale, et qu'en tant que tels, ils ne portaient pas atteinte ¨¤ l'¨¦valuation globalement satisfaisante. En cons¨¦quence, le Tribunal d'appel a souscrit ¨¤ la d¨¦cision de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT selon laquelle l'¨¦valuation des performances contest¨¦e n'¨¦tait pas une ? d¨¦cision...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que l'administration avait ouvert une enqu¨ºte pr¨¦liminaire sur le comportement de l'agent en ce qui concerne le vol ostensible d'argent liquide dans le coffre-fort du bureau, qu'elle ¨¦tait parvenue ¨¤ un accord avec lui concernant le remboursement, et qu'elle avait ensuite demand¨¦ l'ouverture d'une proc¨¦dure p¨¦nale en d¨¦posant une plainte au p¨¦nal et en le remettant ¨¤ la police locale. Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'¨¦tant donn¨¦ que les faits sous-jacents de l'affaire concernaient son comportement en tant que membre du personnel des Nations unies vis-¨¤-vis de son employeur, le TANU aurait d?...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que la demande de l'agent n'¨¦tait pas recevable ratione materiae. Il a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que l'e-mail identifi¨¦ comme la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e ¨¦tait une r¨¦ponse g¨¦n¨¦rale du partenaire des ressources humaines ¨¤ la demande g¨¦n¨¦rale de l'agent concernant le SEG, qui n'abordait pas sa situation personnelle. En tant que tel, il ne constituait pas une d¨¦cision administrative individuelle ou d¨¦finitive affectant ses conditions d'engagement au titre de la r¨¨gle 11.2(a) du R¨¨glement du personnel.

Le TANU a rejet¨¦ l'appel et confirm¨¦ le jugement n¡ã Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2023/107, bien que pour des raisons...

? titre pr¨¦liminaire, le Tribunal d'appel a rejet¨¦ les demandes d'audience des appelants au motif qu'une audience ne serait pas rapide et qu'¨¤ la lumi¨¨re des observations ¨¦crites d¨¦taill¨¦es, il n'y aurait rien ¨¤ gagner ¨¤ entendre les avocats des appelants en personne.

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ qu'en l'absence d'une promesse expresse de renouvellement des engagements ¨¤ dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e des requ¨¦rants, ces derniers n'avaient pas d'esp¨¦rance l¨¦gitime de renouvellement de leurs contrats ¨¤ dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e. Les d¨¦clarations donnant des assurances aux membres du personnel de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOPS n'ont pas ¨¦t¨¦...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the staff member¡¯s application was not receivable ratione materiae. It further found that the e-mail identified as the contested decision was a general response from the Human Resources Partner to the staff member¡¯s general inquiry regarding SEG, which did not address his personal situation. As such, it did not constitute an individual or final administrative decision affecting his terms of appointment under Staff Rule 11.2(a).

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2023/107, albeit for different reasons, with Judge Colgan dissenting.

As a preliminary matter, the Appeals Tribunal dismissed the Appellants' requests for an oral hearing on grounds that an oral hearing would not be expeditious and that in light of comprehensive written submissions nothing would be gained from hearing the Appellants¡¯ counsel in person.

The Appeals Tribunal found that in the absence of an express promise of renewal of the Appellants¡¯ fixed-term appointments, the Appellants did not have a legitimate expectation of renewal of their fixed-term contracts. The statements giving assurances to Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOPS staff members were not made by a Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOPS official with...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT correctly held that it was within the SRO's discretion to make comments on Ms. Abdellaoui¡¯s performance, that the SRO's disputed comments were reasonable and balanced by other comments that provided a positive perspective supporting the overall rating, and that as such they did not detract from the overall satisfactory appraisal. Accordingly, the Appeals Tribunal concurred with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT¡¯s determination that the challenged performance evaluation was not an ¡°administrative decision¡± and agreed that the application was therefore not receivable ratione...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the Administration had initiated a preliminary investigation into the staff member¡¯s conduct with regard to the ostensible theft of cash from the office safe, reached agreements with him regarding repayment, and then sought initiation of criminal proceedings by filing a criminal complaint and delivering him to the local police. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that because the underlying facts of the case involved his conduct as a United Nations staff member towards his employer, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT should have been competent to review his application on the merits, had it been timely filed.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT rightly identified that the standard of proof for placing the staff member on ALWOP was whether there was reasonable suspicion or reasonable grounds to believe that the staff member had committed the alleged misconduct.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT rejected the staff member¡¯s argument that his ex-wife¡¯s withdrawal of the complaint against him in a national court should have stopped all investigations against him. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the national court had provided the case records to the Agency, and the Agency, following its complete assessment of the situation, can proceed with...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT upheld the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT¡¯s determination of the former staff member¡¯s chances of selection for the position at one-fourth on alternative grounds. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT appropriately considered the possibility that the Agency could have introduced additional candidates on an equivalency basis during a second review after the shortlisting phase. In particular, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT held that, since the sufficient number of candidates for a competitive exercise was normally between three to five candidates per vacancy, it was reasonable to expect that the Agency would have brought more...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the decision not to select the staff member for TJO 161651 was lawful. It held that since the staff member did not challenge the cancellation of TJO 14924, under which the Administration initially advertised the position of Administrative Officer, that cancellation decision was not part of the contested decision under review. In any event, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT determined that the Administration had the discretion to cancel TJO 149241 and re-advertise the position under TJO 161651 after the selected candidate withdrew her candidature. It was under no obligation to invite the second...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not err in finding that the former staff member¡¯s change of title following a reclassification did not amount to an abolition or discontinuance of her post, rendering her termination of appointment unlawful.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT also determined that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not err in awarding the former staff member compensation in lieu of two years¡¯ net base salary. In this regard, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT emphasized that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT correctly considered the fact that the former staff member¡¯s permanent appointment included a specific undertaking stating that she could only be terminated due to an...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT rejected the new evidence submitted for the first time on appeal, which sought to justify the late filing of the case by attributing it to the appellant¡¯s attorney¡¯s personal circumstances.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was of the opinion that staff members must generally adhere to the specified time limits. However, in this case, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT had erred in fact and law in dismissing Mr. Khan¡¯s application as not receivable ratione temporis. It concluded that Mr. Khan¡¯s exceptional circumstances¡ªincluding severe flooding disrupting internet service and affecting his ability to access e...