Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

The Appeals Tribunal held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT correctly found that the decision to recover a portion of Mr. Kulga¡¯s Home Leave lump sum was lawful.

As to the costs awarded against Mr. Kulga, the Appeals Tribunal found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in finding Mr. Kulga¡¯s application to be frivolous as it was not unreasonable for Mr. Kulga to consider that a further challenge to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT could assist him, especially after his management evaluation challenge had been partially successful. In addition, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT¡¯s finding that Mr. Kulga repeatedly lied to the Administration over six months in seeking to obtain...

L¡¯agent a d¨¦pos¨¦ une demande d¡¯indemnisation pour un accident du travail. La Commission consultative des demandes
d¡¯indemnisation a jug¨¦ sa demande prescrite. Elle a demand¨¦ ¨¤ la Commission consultative de r¨¦examiner sa demande et a joint un nouveau formulaire de demande, sur lequel figurait une nouvelle date d¡¯accident. Elle a ensuite d¨¦pos¨¦ de nombreuses demandes et requ¨ºtes en r¨¦examen des d¨¦cisions all¨¦gu¨¦es et des ? non-d¨¦cisions ? concernant le traitement de sa demande.

Le Tribunal administratif des Nations unies (Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT) a not¨¦ qu¡¯il avait d¨¦j¨¤ rendu un arr¨ºt dans lequel il avait jug¨¦ que...

The staff member submitted a claim for compensation for an injury attributable to the performance of official duties. The Advisory Board on Compensation Claims found her claim time-barred. She requested the Advisory Board to reconsider her claim and attached a new claim form, which stated a new date of the injury. She subsequently filed many claims and requests for reviews of alleged decisions and ¡°non decisions¡± concerning the processing of her claim.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that it had rendered its prior Judgment in which it held that the staff member¡¯s application challenging alleged decisions and...

L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯inscription du nom de l¡¯ancien fonctionnaire dans la base de donn¨¦es ClearCheck r¨¦sultait de la d¨¦cision
d¨¦finitive de l¡¯Administration selon laquelle il avait commis des abus sexuels et du harc¨¨lement sexuel ¨¤ l¡¯encontre de la plaignante, et que, dans la mesure o¨´ cette inscription l¡¯emp¨ºchait d¡¯occuper ¨¤ l¡¯avenir un emploi au sein du syst¨¨me commun des Nations Unies, elle constituait en r¨¦alit¨¦ une mesure disciplinaire et devait ¨ºtre examin¨¦e en tant que telle.

L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que le recours du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral concernant le recours ¨¤ un expert en psychologie dans l...

L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ qu¡¯elle n¡¯avait pas comp¨¦tence ¨¤ l¡¯¨¦gard de Mme Fogarty, car celle-ci ¨¦tait une ancienne employ¨¦e de l¡¯OMI et que la d¨¦cision qu¡¯elle contestait ¨C ¨¤ savoir l¡¯absence d¡¯enqu¨ºte de la part de l¡¯OMI ¨¤ l¡¯encontre du directeur de l¡¯administration ¨C n¡¯avait pas d¡¯incidence sur les conditions de son ancien contrat de travail. Le TNA a relev¨¦ qu¡¯il avait d¨¦j¨¤ ¨¦tabli, dans son jugement n¡ã 2026-TNA-1620, que le comportement du directeur de l¡¯administration, dont Mme Fogarty se plaignait, n¡¯avait entra?n¨¦ aucune cons¨¦quence n¨¦gative pour elle en ce qui concerne sa demande de prestations...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that entering the former staff member's name into the ClearCheck database was because of the Administration¡¯s final determination that he sexually abused and sexually harassed the Complainant, and as the entry precludes him from any future employment in the United Nations common system, it was effectively a disciplinary measure and should be reviewed as such.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal regarding the engagement of a psychology expert in Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT Order No. 053 was receivable. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT, by engaging an expert to ¡°analyze the facts¡± and ¡°ask...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that it did not have personal jurisdiction over Ms. Fogarty because she was a former staff member of the IMO and the decision that she challenged, the IMO¡¯s failure to investigate the Director of Administration, did not impact the terms of her former employment.The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that it had already determined in Judgment No. 2026-Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT-1620 that there was no negative consequence to Ms. Fogarty from the conduct that she complained of by the Director of Administration, with respect to Ms. Fogarty¡¯s claim to Appendix D benefits. Other than the Appendix D claim, which was adjudicated...

L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait commis une erreur en concluant que les faits ¨¦tablis ¨¤ l¡¯origine des all¨¦gations ne constituaient pas une faute professionnelle. Elle a jug¨¦ que la participation r¨¦guli¨¨re de l¡¯ancien membre du personnel ¨¤ des ¨¦changes portant sur le partage d¡¯informations non publiques, ainsi que ses communications avec M.R., une personne s¡¯exprimant publiquement sur des questions relatives au Bureau de gestion des investissements (OIM), constituaient une divulgation non autoris¨¦e ou, ¨¤ tout le moins, une participation ¨¤ un partage non autoris¨¦ d¡¯informations non publiques.

L...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in finding that the established facts underlying the allegations did not amount to misconduct. It found that the former staff member's sustained participation in exchanges concerning the sharing of non-public information and his communications with M.R., an individual engaging publicly on matters pertaining to the Office of Investment Management (OIM), constituted unauthorized disclosure or, at minimum, participation in unauthorized sharing of non-public information.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in characterizing as too vague the allegation that the...

L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯ancien membre du personnel s¡¯¨¦tait rendu coupable de harc¨¨lement sexuel ¨¤ l¡¯¨¦gard de la plaignante en :
i) p¨¦n¨¦trant dans son logement sans y avoir ¨¦t¨¦ invit¨¦, en l¡¯¨¦treignant, en l¡¯embrassant et en lui l¨¦chant le front sans son
consentement, en l¡¯allongeant sur son lit pour s¡¯allonger ¨¤ ses c?t¨¦s, et en refusant de partir lorsqu¡¯elle le lui a demand¨¦ ; et ii) en lui disant le lendemain qu¡¯elle n¡¯avait pas pu dormir parce qu¡¯elle avait pens¨¦ ¨¤ lui.

L¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait fourni une analyse claire et motiv¨¦e de la cr¨¦dibilit¨¦ des t¨¦moins. Elle a conclu que la...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the former staff member committed sexual harassment towards the Complainant by: i) entering her accommodation without invitation, hugging, kissing, and licking her forehead without her consent, reclining her on her bed to lie next to him, and refusing to leave when asked; and ii) telling her the following day that she had been unable to sleep because she had been thinking of him.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT had provided a clear and reasoned analysis of the witnesses¡¯ credibility.It concluded that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT¡¯s determination that certain discrepancies in the Complainant¡¯s...