2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1678, Imad Hassanein
Ce membre du personnel, qui ¨¦tait en poste ¨¤ Khartoum, a ¨¦t¨¦ ¨¦vacu¨¦ lorsque la guerre civile a ¨¦clat¨¦ au Soudan. Il a d¨¦pos¨¦ une demande d¡¯indemnisation pour la perte d¡¯effets personnels imputable ¨¤ son service.
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a estim¨¦ qu¡¯en rejetant la demande du fonctionnaire visant ¨¤ ce que l¡¯affaire soit renvoy¨¦e en m¨¦diation, le Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT avait
l¨¦galement exerc¨¦ son pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire en mati¨¨re de gestion des affaires et n¡¯avait commis aucune erreur de proc¨¦dure.
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a conclu que le Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT n¡¯avait pas commis d¡¯erreur en qualifiant l¡¯argument du fonctionnaire de contestation de la politique de l...
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1678, Imad Hassanein
The staff member, who was serving in Khartoum, was evacuated when civil war erupted in Sudan. He submitted a claim for compensation for loss of personal effects attributable to service.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that by denying the staff member¡¯s request for referral to mediation the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had lawfully exercised its case management discretion and had not committed an error of procedure.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had not erred when it identified the staff member¡¯s argument as a challenge to the policy of the Organization but had erred when it held that it did not have jurisdiction to incidentally examine...
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1673, Masoud Taghavi
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a not¨¦ que le fonctionnaire avait demand¨¦ une ¨¦valuation par la direction 64 jours apr¨¨s avoir ¨¦t¨¦ inform¨¦ de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e.
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a jug¨¦ sans fondement les arguments du fonctionnaire selon lesquels le retard dans la demande d¡¯¨¦valuation par la direction avait ¨¦t¨¦ minime ou que son incapacit¨¦ permanente constituait un cas de force majeure que l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT ¨¦tait tenue de prendre en consid¨¦ration.
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT n¡¯a constat¨¦ aucune erreur dans la d¨¦cision de l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT de d¨¦clarer la requ¨ºte irrecevable ratione materiae.
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a rejet¨¦ le pourvoi et a confirm¨¦ le jugement de l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT.
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1673, Masoud Taghavi
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that the staff member had requested management evaluation 64 days after he was informed of the contested decision.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found no merit in the staff member¡¯s arguments that the delay in requesting management evaluation had been minimal or that his permanent incapacity constituted a force majeure which the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT was obliged to consider.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found no error in the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT finding the application not receivable ratione materiae.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Judgment.
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1640, Fekadu Kebede, Secretary-General of the United Nations
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT n¡¯avait pas commis d¡¯erreur dans la d¨¦finition de la port¨¦e de la demande de M. Kebede, et que son all¨¦gation de repr¨¦sailles syst¨¦miques n¡¯avait pas ¨¦t¨¦ valablement soumise ¨¤ l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT. M. Kebede n¡¯a contest¨¦ la d¨¦cision de
non-s¨¦lection que dans sa demande d¡¯¨¦valuation par la direction et dans sa requ¨ºte adress¨¦e ¨¤ l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT.
Le TNDU a partag¨¦ l¡¯avis du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral selon lequel il n¡¯existait aucune preuve de fausset¨¦ mat¨¦rielle ou de d¨¦claration trompeuse de la part de l¡¯Administration ¨¤ l¡¯¨¦gard du TNDU concernant la note attribu¨¦e ¨¤ M. Kebede lors de l¡¯entretien...
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1640, Fekadu Kebede, Secretary-General of the United Nations
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT did not err in its framing of the scope of Mr. Kebede¡¯s application, and that his claim of systemic retaliation was not properly before the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT. Mr. Kebede only contested the non-selection decision both in his request for management evaluation and application to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT agreed with the Secretary-General that there was no evidence of material falsehood or misrepresentation by the Administration to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT relating to Mr. Kebede¡¯s rating during the interview for the post. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that the ¡°Partially Satisfactory¡± rating was an assessment of how Mr...
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1618, Varun Singh Phogat
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯ancien membre du personnel n¡¯avait pas demand¨¦ d¡¯audience orale au cours de la proc¨¦dure devant l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT et ne pouvait donc pas ¨ºtre autoris¨¦ ¨¤ le faire en appel. L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT, en tant qu¡¯instance charg¨¦e d¡¯appr¨¦cier les faits, ne peut ¨ºtre contourn¨¦e.
L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT n¡¯a constat¨¦ aucune erreur dans la conclusion de l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT selon laquelle les griefs formul¨¦s par l¡¯ancien membre du
personnel apr¨¨s sa cessation de service sortaient du champ de comp¨¦tence de cette derni¨¨re et n¡¯¨¦taient pas recevables, faute de
demande pr¨¦alable et introduite dans les d¨¦lais en vue d¡¯une ¨¦valuation par la...
2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1618, Varun Singh Phogat
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the former staff member did not request an oral hearing during proceedings before the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT and thus cannot be allowed to do so on appeal. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT as the trier of fact cannot be bypassed.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT found no error in the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT¡¯s finding that the former staff member¡¯s post-separation grievances were beyond its scope of adjudication and not receivable because there was no prior and timely request for management evaluation. The sanction for non-compliance with this mandatory internal procedure is the non-receivability of the application challenging the contested decision.
The...