Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

L'ASG/OHR a examin¨¦ tous les faits pertinents et a pes¨¦ les raisons fournies par le directeur du RSCE. Elle a pris en consid¨¦ration les circonstances entourant le service ant¨¦rieur de la requ¨¦rante dans le cadre d'un engagement temporaire, ainsi que la d¨¦rogation pr¨¦c¨¦demment accord¨¦e ¨¤ la s?ur de la requ¨¦rante.

Le d¨¦fendeur n'a pas cr¨¦¨¦ d'attente l¨¦gitime que la d¨¦rogation pr¨¦c¨¦demment accord¨¦e ¨¤ la s?ur du requ¨¦rant entra?nerait automatiquement l'octroi ult¨¦rieur d'une d¨¦rogation au requ¨¦rant ; en effet, la d¨¦rogation dans le pass¨¦ avait une base factuelle diff¨¦rente dans le type et la...

The ASG/OHR considered all the relevant facts, and weighed the reasons provided by the Director of the RSCE. She considered the circumstances surrounding the Applicant¡¯s prior service on a temporary appointment, and the exception previously granted to the Applicant¡¯s sister.

The Respondent created no legitimate expectation that the exception previously granted to the Applicant¡¯s sister would automatically result in the Applicant being later granted an exception, too; indeed, the derogation in the past had a different factual basis in the type and length of the relationship (and the temporary...

Lorsqu'un agent conteste plusieurs d¨¦cisions administratives diff¨¦rentes qui doivent ¨ºtre consid¨¦r¨¦es comme un tout, avec un effet cumulatif, il n'est pas n¨¦cessaire de les contester une ¨¤ une (par une demande d'¨¦valuation de la gestion et ensuite par une requ¨ºte devant le Tribunal).

Le requ¨¦rant all¨¨gue qu'il a ¨¦t¨¦ priv¨¦ de ses fonctions essentielles en 2018 et 2019, soit plus de deux ans avant la demande. Il n'a demand¨¦ l'¨¦valuation de sa gestion qu'en avril 2021 contre une d¨¦cision de 2018, et non contre les d¨¦cisions administratives ult¨¦rieures. M¨ºme si le Tribunal admettait que la...

Where a staff member is challenging many different administrative decisions to be considered as a whole,with cumulative effect, there is no need to challenge them (by a management evaluation request and then application before the Tribunal) one by one.

The Applicant alleged that he was deprived of his core functions in 2018 and 2019, that is more than two years before the application. He only requested management evaluation in April 2021 against a 2018 decision, and not towards the subsequent administrative decisions.

Even if the Tribunal accepted that the last of the adverse decisions was...

La requ¨ºte a ¨¦t¨¦ rejet¨¦e.

The application was dismissed.

En l'esp¨¨ce, les faits ont ¨¦t¨¦ ¨¦tablis et il existe des preuves claires et convaincantes que le requ¨¦rant a commis une fraude d¨¦lib¨¦r¨¦e.

La conduite du requ¨¦rant constitue une violation de ses obligations fondamentales en vertu des articles 1.2(b) et (g) du Statut, de la r¨¨gle 1.2(i) du Statut et du Cadre strat¨¦gique pour la pr¨¦vention de la fraude et de la corruption.

Les preuves sont claires et convaincantes que le requ¨¦rant a agi en connaissance de cause et avec l'intention d'induire en erreur (et m¨ºme avec un possible int¨¦r¨ºt ¨¦conomique personnel).

Compte tenu de la nature et de la...

In this case, the facts were established and there was clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant committed fraud on purpose.

The Applicant¡¯s conduct amounted to a breach of his basic obligations under staff regulations 1.2(b) and (g), staff rule 1.2(i), and the Strategic Framework for the Prevention of Fraud and Corruption.

The evidence is clear and convincing that the Applicant acted with knowledge and intent to mislead (and even with a possible personal economic interest).

Given the nature and gravity of the Applicant¡¯s misconduct, the sanction is not absurd, unreasonable, or...

La requ¨ºte est mal fond¨¦e et rejet¨¦e.

The motion is ill-founded and dismissed.

La demande est rejet¨¦e dans sa totalit¨¦.

The application fails in its entirety.

Les Nations unies, en tant qu'employeur exemplaire, devraient ¨ºtre tenues ¨¤ des normes plus ¨¦lev¨¦es et le d¨¦fendeur est donc cens¨¦ traiter les membres du personnel avec le respect qu'ils m¨¦ritent, y compris le respect de leur bien-¨ºtre.

Ce devoir de protection s'applique non seulement aux maladies physiques, mais aussi aux maladies psychologiques.

Cela implique le devoir d'intervenir rapidement pour prot¨¦ger le membre du personnel dont la sant¨¦ est menac¨¦e.

Il a fallu 22 mois ¨¤ l'administration pour d¨¦terminer si la pathologie du requ¨¦rant ¨¦tait li¨¦e ¨¤ l'environnement de travail et le...

Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ, as an exemplary employer, should be held to higher standards and the Respondent is therefore expected to treat staff members with the respect they deserve, including respect for their well-being.

This duty of protection applies not only to physical disease, but also to psychological disease.

This implies a duty to intervene promptly to protect the staff member, at risk for his/her health.

it took 22 months for the Administration to assess if the Applicant¡¯s pathology was related to the work environment and therefore the Tribunal was of the view that the ABCC unduly...

La mise en place du groupe d'enqu¨ºte, comme l'exige la loi, rend la demande sans objet.

The establishment of the fact-finding panel, as statutorily required, renders the application moot.

Le Tribunal, sur la base des preuves au dossier, a ¨¦tabli que la facture et le rapport m¨¦dical que le requ¨¦rant a soumis ¨¤ Cigna pour remboursement n'¨¦taient pas authentiques. Malgr¨¦ ce qui pr¨¦c¨¨de, le requ¨¦rant a certifi¨¦ ¨¤ Cigna que les informations qu'il soumettait ¨¦taient "correctes et v¨¦ridiques" et reconnaissait donc qu'il avait connaissance du contenu de la demande de remboursement des frais m¨¦dicaux et qu'il attestait de son authenticit¨¦.

Le Tribunal a ¨¦galement conclu qu'aucune preuve de l'efficacit¨¦ du traitement m¨¦dical n'a ¨¦t¨¦ apport¨¦e. A l'exception de la fausse facture et du...

The Tribunal, based on the evidence on the record, established that the invoice and the medical report that the Applicant submitted to Cigna for reimbursement were not authentic. Despite the foregoing, the Applicant certified to Cigna that the information he was submitting was ¡°correct and true¡± and was therefore, acknowledging that he was aware of the contents of the medical claim and attesting to its authenticity.

The Tribunal further concluded that no evidence was offered of the effectiveness of the medical treatment. Excluding the fake invoice and the fake medical report, no other...

Le d¨¦fendeur versera au requ¨¦rant des dommages-int¨¦r¨ºts ¨¦quivalant ¨¤ trois mois de salaire de base net ¨¤ la classe P-3. L'indemnit¨¦ porte int¨¦r¨ºt au taux de base des ?tats-Unis d'Am¨¦rique ¨¤ compter de la date ¨¤ laquelle le pr¨¦sent arr¨ºt devient ex¨¦cutoire jusqu'au paiement de ladite indemnit¨¦. Un suppl¨¦ment de cinq pour cent sera appliqu¨¦ au taux pr¨¦f¨¦rentiel des ?tats-Unis d'Am¨¦rique 60 jours apr¨¨s la date ¨¤ laquelle l'arr¨ºt devient ex¨¦cutoire.

The Respondent shall pay to the Applicant damages equivalent to three months¡¯ net base salary at the P-3 level. The compensation shall bear interest at the United States of America prime rate with effect from the date this Judgment becomes executable until payment of said compensation. An additional five per cent shall be applied to the United States of America prime rate 60 days from the date the Judgment becomes executable.