Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the staff member¡¯s involvement in rental subsidy fraud by two claimants had been established by clear and convincing evidence: the Administration had demonstrated that the actual amount paid to the staff member in monthly rent was not the amount shown on the lease. In addition, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT had correctly determined that he had instigated one of the claimants to submit a fraudulent claim for the subsidy for real estate agent¡¯s fees.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that even if the staff member had not benefitted personally or directly from the fraudulent subsidies, the...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que l'agent avait eu amplement l'occasion de commenter son transfert lat¨¦ral. Le TANU a not¨¦ qu'elle avait ¨¦t¨¦ inform¨¦e de la recommandation de la s¨¦parer de son premier sup¨¦rieur hi¨¦rarchique, contre lequel elle avait d¨¦pos¨¦ une plainte pour conduite prohib¨¦e, et qu'elle avait eu l'occasion d'exprimer ses pr¨¦occupations.
Le TANU a reconnu que les responsabilit¨¦s et les fonctions du nouveau poste correspondaient aux comp¨¦tences, aux aptitudes et ¨¤ l'exp¨¦rience de l'agent. Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'il n'y avait pas eu de risque accru pour sa s¨¦curit¨¦ d'emploi future et qu'elle n...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the staff member had had ample opportunity to comment on her lateral transfer. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that she had been aware of the recommendation to separate her from her First Reporting Officer, against whom she had made a complaint of prohibited conduct, and had had the opportunity to voice her concerns and also had been informed of the reassignment decision nearly a month before she took up the new post.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT accepted that the responsibilities and job functions of the new post had been commensurate with the staff member¡¯s competence, skills, and experience. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found...

Le TANU a jug¨¦ irrecevable le fait que M. Lago se soit appuy¨¦ sur des ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve suppl¨¦mentaires sans d¨¦poser de requ¨ºte.
Le TANU a confirm¨¦ qu'il n'y avait aucune preuve qu'une demande sp¨¦cifique d'¨¦valuation de la sant¨¦ au travail, faite par M. Lago, ¨¤ titre individuel, ¨¤ un fonctionnaire comp¨¦tent, ait ¨¦t¨¦ refus¨¦e ou ignor¨¦e. En outre, les demandes de M. Lago refl¨¦taient ses tentatives persistantes de contester un tort per?u, qui ne peut ¨ºtre per?u en soi comme une d¨¦cision administrative implicite.
Le TANU a conclu qu'en l'absence de toute preuve d'une demande claire susceptible...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that, Mr. Lago¡¯s reliance on additional evidence without filing a motion, was inadmissible.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT confirmed that, there was no evidence that a specific request for an occupational health evaluation, made by Mr. Lago, in an individual capacity to an appropriate official, was refused or ignored. Additionally, Mr. Lago¡¯s requests mirrored his persistent attempts to challenge a perceived wrong, which on its own cannot be perceived as an implied administrative decision.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT concluded that, in the absence of any evidence of a clear request capable of giving rise to an...

Le TANU a rejet¨¦ les nouveaux arguments et ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve soumis pour la premi¨¨re fois au Tribunal d'appel, qui visaient ¨¤ d¨¦montrer que M. El-Anani n'avait pas lu la pi¨¨ce jointe du courriel communiquant la sanction disciplinaire.
Le TANU a confirm¨¦ que les deux enregistrements de notification Microsoft Outlook reconnus par M. El-Anani indiquaient que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e lui avait ¨¦t¨¦ remise et qu'il l'avait lue le 28 mars 2023 et qu'il ¨¦tait donc tenu de d¨¦poser sa demande aupr¨¨s du TANU au plus tard le 26 juin 2023. ?tant donn¨¦ que M. Al-Anani n'a d¨¦pos¨¦ sa demande que le 28 juin 2023...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT 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¢¹½ÊÓƵAT 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¢¹½ÊÓƵDT by no later than 26 June 2023. Since Mr. Al-Anani did not file the application until 28 June 2023...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA avait ordonn¨¦ ¨¤ chaque partie de d¨¦signer un psychiatre, qui ¨¤ son tour devait d¨¦signer un troisi¨¨me psychiatre pour examiner si l'¨¦tat mental de l'agent au moment o¨´ il a commis le cambriolage, dont la condamnation avait ¨¦t¨¦ le motif de sa s¨¦paration dans l'int¨¦r¨ºt de l'Agence. Le Commissaire g¨¦n¨¦ral n'a pas respect¨¦ cette instruction, sans explication, laissant ainsi le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA sans information m¨¦dicale sur l'¨¦tat de AAW au moment du cambriolage.
Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Commissaire g¨¦n¨¦ral avait clairement et manifestement abus¨¦ de la proc¨¦dure par...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT had ordered each party to nominate a psychiatrist, who in turn were to designate a third psychiatrist to review whether the staff member¡¯s mental condition at the time he committed the burglary, sentencing for which had been the grounds for his separation in the interest of the Agency.The Commissioner-General failed to comply with this instruction, without explanation, thereby leaving the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT with no medical information about AAW's condition at the time of the burglary.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Commissioner-General had clearly and manifestly abused the...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que la demande de reclassement avait ¨¦t¨¦ faite par la FINUL et non par l'agent.

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que, bien que d'importants retards se soient produits avant que la demande de reclassement ne soit examin¨¦e par l'administration, aucune d¨¦cision finale de reclassement n'avait ¨¦t¨¦ prise au moment o¨´ la demande a ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pos¨¦e aupr¨¨s du TANU par l'agent. Par cons¨¦quent, ¨¦tant donn¨¦ qu'aucune d¨¦cision n'avait encore ¨¦t¨¦ prise, l'agent n'a pas pu subir d'effet n¨¦gatif direct sur les conditions de son engagement. Le fait qu'il y ait eu des retards dans la d¨¦cision de reclassement ne...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the reclassification request was made by Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵIFIL and not by the staff member.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that although extensive delays occurred before the request for reclassification was determined by the Administration, no final reclassification decision had been taken at the time the application was filed to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT by the staff member. Accordingly, since no decision had been made yet, she could not have experienced a direct adverse effect on the terms of her appointment. The fact that there were delays in the reclassification decision does not change the analysis. It is a...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT s'¨¦tait appuy¨¦ ¨¤ juste titre sur des preuves claires et convaincantes pour conclure que l'agent avait pr¨¦sent¨¦ ¨¤ Cigna une demande de remboursement de frais m¨¦dicaux pour des services m¨¦dicaux qui n'avaient jamais ¨¦t¨¦ fournis.
Le TANU a estim¨¦ que les ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve ¨¦tablissaient qu'il ¨¦tait hautement probable que l'agent avait fait une fausse d¨¦claration ¨¤ la Cigna dans l'intention de tromper et que ses actions avaient ¨¦t¨¦ potentiellement pr¨¦judiciables au PNUD, qui ¨¦tait susceptible de subir des pertes dues ¨¤ des remboursements indus.
Le TANU a constat¨¦ que la...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT had appropriately relied on the clear and convincing evidence to conclude that the staff member had submitted a medical insurance claim to Cigna for medical services that had never been provided.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the evidence established that it was highly probable that the staff member had made the misrepresentation to Cigna with the intent to deceive and that his actions had been potentially prejudicial to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDP which was subject to any loss from undue reimbursements.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the staff member¡¯s certification to Cigna of the correctness of the...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le TNDU avait commis une erreur en estimant que la circulaire ST/SGB/2003/13 imposait l'existence d'un "avantage indu" pour qu'il y ait exploitation sexuelle. Le TANU a ¨¦galement conclu que l'ancien membre du personnel avait abus¨¦ de la position de vuln¨¦rabilit¨¦ de V01 ¨¤ des fins sexuelles (c'est-¨¤-dire en se livrant ¨¤ au moins quatre actes sexuels), ce qui constitue une exploitation et un abus sexuels. Le TANU a soulign¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT elle-m¨ºme avait reconnu que V01, pr¨¦tendument mineure, ¨¦tait vuln¨¦rable et moins puissante que l'ancien membre du personnel, et que ses...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in finding that ST/SGB/2003/13 imposes a requirement of ¡°undue advantage¡± for sexual exploitation to occur. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT further found that the former staff member abused the position of vulnerability of V01 for sexual purposes (i.e., engaging in at least four acts of sexual intercourse), which constitutes sexual exploitation and abuse. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT emphasized that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT itself acknowledged that V01, allegedly a minor, was vulnerable and less powerful than the former staff member, and that his actions had a sexual connotation. Therefore, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur de proc¨¦dure affectant l'issue de l'affaire en rejetant partiellement les requ¨ºtes de l'ancien fonctionnaire visant ¨¤ obtenir des preuves suppl¨¦mentaires ou en ne lui accordant pas un d¨¦lai suppl¨¦mentaire suffisant pour r¨¦pondre aux observations du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral.
Le TANU a ¨¦galement conclu que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait correctement identifi¨¦ la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e comme ¨¦tant la d¨¦cision du 1er avril 2022 le d¨¦clarant in¨¦ligible ¨¤ participer ¨¤ l'ASHI. Le TANU a observ¨¦ que l'ancien fonctionnaire avait lui-m¨ºme identifi¨¦ cette d¨¦cision ¨¤ la...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not commit any error in procedure that affected the outcome of the case by partially denying the former staff member¡¯s motions for production of additional evidence or by not granting him sufficient additional time to respond to the Secretary-General¡¯s submissions.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT also concluded that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT appropriately identified the contested decision as the 1 April 2022 decision finding him ineligible to participate in ASHI. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT observed that the former staff member himself identified this decision in both his Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT application and his management evaluation...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal avait agi dans le cadre de son pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire en rendant l'arr¨ºt contest¨¦ sans tenir d'audience, d'autant plus que la question ¨¤ examiner ¨¦tait celle de la recevabilit¨¦. Le TANU a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que le TANU n'avait pas commis d'erreur en ne donnant pas ¨¤ l'agent la possibilit¨¦ de commenter la r¨¦ponse du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral, ¨¦tant donn¨¦ qu'il n'avait pas d¨¦pos¨¦ de requ¨ºte en vue d'obtenir des conclusions suppl¨¦mentaires.

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le TANU avait correctement identifi¨¦ que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e ¨¦tait la d¨¦cision de l'administration de ne pas...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que le Tribunal du contentieux administratif avait rendu l'ordonnance contest¨¦e faisant droit ¨¤ la demande de prorogation du d¨¦lai de d¨¦p?t de la requ¨ºte sans que la partie l¨¦s¨¦e ait ¨¦t¨¦ entendue et sans ¨ºtre habilit¨¦ ¨¤ le faire. Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal du contentieux administratif ne s'¨¦tait pas techniquement conform¨¦ ¨¤ ses propres instructions pratiques en rendant l'ordonnance et qu'il avait peut-¨ºtre strictement viol¨¦ les principes de justice naturelle et de proc¨¦dure r¨¦guli¨¨re en ne donnant pas au Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral un pr¨¦avis suffisant de la requ¨ºte et la...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'en demandant ¨¤ la direction d'¨¦valuer le r¨¦sultat n¨¦gatif de la proc¨¦dure de reclassement, l'agent n'avait pas respect¨¦ les r¨¨gles de proc¨¦dure. Il aurait d? faire appel de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e, comme le pr¨¦voient les sections 5 et 6 de l'instruction administrative ST/AI/1998/9 (Syst¨¨me de classement des postes). La demande de l'agent n'¨¦tant pas recevable, le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'il ne pouvait pas examiner ses observations et ses preuves suppl¨¦mentaires concernant le fond de l'affaire. Le TANU a rejet¨¦ la demande d'indemnisation de l'agent ¨¤ la lumi¨¨re de sa d¨¦cision de...