Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

Le TANU a not¨¦ que la requ¨¦rante avait d¨¦pos¨¦ la demande de r¨¦vision quelque trois mois apr¨¨s avoir pris connaissance des faits d¨¦cisifs identifi¨¦s dans la demande. Le TANU a estim¨¦ que la demande avait ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pos¨¦e au-del¨¤ du d¨¦lai de 30 jours et qu'elle n'¨¦tait donc pas recevable.

Le TANU a constat¨¦ qu'en tout ¨¦tat de cause, l'un des documents n'existait pas au moment de l'arr¨ºt du TANU. Le TANU a ¨¦galement not¨¦ que le document n'avait pas ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦cisif pour parvenir ¨¤ une d¨¦cision dans l'appel et que, pour cette raison, la demande constituait une tentative de r¨¦examen de l'appel. Le TANU a...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the applicant had filed the application for revision some three months after she became aware of the decisive facts as identified in the application. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the application had been filed beyond the 30-day time limit and was, therefore, not receivable.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that, in any event, one of the documents had not been in existence at the time of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Judgment. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT also noted that the document had not been decisive in reaching a decision in the appeal and, for this reason, the application was an attempt to re-litigate the appeal. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT concluded...

Mme Ocokoru a interjet¨¦ appel.

Le Tribunal d'appel a rejet¨¦ l'appel. Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que Mme Ocokoru n'avait pas d¨¦pos¨¦ son recours dans le d¨¦lai applicable conform¨¦ment ¨¤ l'article 7(1) du Statut du TANU et n'avait pas demand¨¦ de suspension, de renonciation ou de prorogation des d¨¦lais. Le TANU a conclu que le recours ¨¦tait donc prescrit et non recevable ratione temporis.

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ qu'en tout ¨¦tat de cause, le TANU n'avait pas commis d'erreur en d¨¦clarant la requ¨ºte irrecevable ratione materiae au motif que les arguments soulev¨¦s par Mme Ocokoru avaient d¨¦j¨¤...

Ms. Ocokoru filed an appeal.

The Appeals Tribunal dismissed the appeal. The Appeals Tribunal found that Ms. Ocokoru had failed to file her appeal within the applicable time limit pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Statute and had failed to request a suspension, waiver or extension of the time limits. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT concluded that the appeal was therefore time-barred and not receivable ratione temporis.

The Appeals Tribunal found that, in any event, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not err in finding the application not receivable ratione materiae on grounds that the arguments raised by Ms. Ocokoru had already...

En ce qui concerne l'application pr¨¦tendument discriminatoire et arbitraire de la r¨¨gle 105.3 du personnel de l'OACI concernant les heures suppl¨¦mentaires, le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que la Commission de recours n'avait pas commis d'erreur en constatant que M. Alvear n'avait pas identifi¨¦ de d¨¦cision administrative sp¨¦cifique susceptible de recours, et qu'elle n'avait donc pas commis d'erreur en rejetant sa demande.

En ce qui concerne la plainte de M. Alvear selon laquelle il n'avait pas re?u les r¨¦sultats de la classification de son poste, le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que la Commission de...

With respect to the alleged discriminatory and arbitrary application of ICAO Staff Rule 105.3 regarding overtime, the Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Appeals Board had made no error in finding that Mr. Alvear had failed to identify any specific appealable administrative decision, and that it therefore did not err in dismissing his application.

Turning to Mr. Alvear¡¯s complaint that he did not receive the desk audit classification results for his position, the Appeals Tribunal found that the ICAO Appeals Board did err in finding the application not receivable since the Administration¡¯s...

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que la d¨¦cision de l'administration de ne pas poursuivre l'enqu¨ºte sur les all¨¦gations de M. Lutfiev contre son ancien chef de cabinet ¨¦tait une d¨¦cision qu'elle ¨¦tait en droit de prendre ¨¦tant donn¨¦ que l'ancien chef de cabinet n'¨¦tait plus un membre du personnel de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA.

En outre, le Tribunal d'appel est convaincu que la d¨¦cision du DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA annulant la cessation de service de M. Lutfiev a ¨¦t¨¦ prise ¨¤ tort. Le Tribunal du contentieux administratif a appliqu¨¦ une m¨¦thodologie erron¨¦e pour examiner les motifs de la cessation de service de M.

Lutfiev et n...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the Administration¡¯s decision not to investigate further Mr. Lutfiev¡¯s allegations against his former Chief of Staff was one which it was entitled to make given that the former Chief of Staff was no longer an Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA staff member.

Furthermore, the Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT¡¯s decision rescinding Mr. Lutfiev¡¯s separation from service was decided erroneously. The Dispute Tribunal applied the wrong methodology to its consideration of the grounds for Mr. Lutfiev¡¯s separation from service and failed to undertake what is known as the four...

D'embl¨¦e, le Tribunal d'appel a not¨¦ que Mme Monasebian n'avait fourni que peu ou pas de raisons ¨¤ l'appui de sa demande d'anonymisation de l'arr¨ºt, si ce n'est une d¨¦claration g¨¦n¨¦rale selon laquelle les informations relatives ¨¤ son affaire ¨¦taient sensibles. Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que l'anonymisation n'¨¦tait pas justifi¨¦e en l'esp¨¨ce et a rejet¨¦ sa demande.

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant qu'il existait une pr¨¦pond¨¦rance de la preuve que Mme Monasebian avait adopt¨¦ un comportement qui avait cr¨¦¨¦ un environnement de travail intimidant...

At the outset, the Appeals Tribunal noted that Ms. Monasebian had provided little or no reason in support of her request for the anonymization of the Judgment other than a general statement that the information in her case was sensitive. The Appeals Tribunal took the view that anonymization was not warranted in this case and dismissed her request.

The Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not err in finding that there was a preponderance of the evidence that Ms. Monasebian had engaged in a pattern of conduct through which she created an intimidating, hostile and/or offensive work...

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦, en ce qui concerne la premi¨¨re demande, que Mme Said n'avait produit aucune preuve de pr¨¦judice, et encore moins de pr¨¦judice caus¨¦ par une ill¨¦galit¨¦, et que la demande de dommages-int¨¦r¨ºts ¨¦tait donc rejet¨¦e.
En ce qui concerne la deuxi¨¨me demande, le Tribunal d'appel a constat¨¦ que l'enqu¨ºte avait ¨¦t¨¦ cl?tur¨¦e sans qu'aucune mesure n'ait ¨¦t¨¦ prise et qu'aucun ¨¦l¨¦ment d¨¦favorable r¨¦sultant de cette enqu¨ºte n'avait ¨¦t¨¦ vers¨¦ au dossier administratif de Mme Said. En l'absence de d¨¦cision administrative susceptible de recours, le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que le...

The Appeals Tribunal found, in relation to the first application, that Ms. Said has produced no evidence of harm, much less of harm caused by an illegality, and therefore the request for damages was denied.

As to the second application, the Appeals Tribunal found that the investigation had been closed with no action taken, and no adverse material from that investigation had been placed in Ms. Said¡¯s Official Status File. In the absence of an appealable administrative deciison, the Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT was correct in finding that the second application was not...

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait ¨¤ juste titre rejet¨¦ la demande de M. Salon comme irrecevable au motif qu'il n'avait pas ¨¦tabli qu'une d¨¦cision administrative susceptible de recours avait ¨¦t¨¦ prise par l'Organisation et qu'en tout ¨¦tat de cause, il n'avait pas demand¨¦ d'¨¦valuation de la gestion.

The Appeals Tribunal found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT correctly dismissed Mr. Salon¡¯s application as not receivable on grounds that he had failed to establish that an appealable administrative decision had been taken by the Organization and that in any event, he had failed to request management evaluation.

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦, en ce qui concerne l'exclusion de M. Qasem de la consid¨¦ration pour le poste de chef int¨¦rimaire, que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA avait commis une erreur en estimant que la candidature de M. Qasem n'¨¦tait pas recevable.Le Tribunal d'appel a toutefois estim¨¦ que, dans les circonstances de l'esp¨¨ce, il ¨¦tait dans l'int¨¦r¨ºt de l'¨¦conomie judiciaire de r¨¦examiner l'affaire sur le fond sans renvoi.Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que si l'administration avait ill¨¦galement exclu la candidature de M. Qasem de l'examen, cette irr¨¦gularit¨¦ n'avait eu aucune incidence sur la d¨¦cision de...

The Appeals Tribunal found, in relation to Mr. Qasem¡¯s exclusion from consideration for the Acting Head position, that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT erred in finding Mr. Qasem¡¯s application not receivable. The Appeals Tribunal however found that in the circumstances of this case, it was in the interest of judicial economy to review the case on the merits without remand. The Appeals Tribunal found that while the Administration had unlawfully excluded Mr. Qasem¡¯s application from consideration, this irregularity had no impact on the selection decision. Considering Mr. Qasem¡¯s performance, administrative and...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que l'implication de l'agent dans la fraude ¨¤ la subvention locative commise par deux demandeurs avait ¨¦t¨¦ ¨¦tablie par des preuves claires et convaincantes : l'administration avait d¨¦montr¨¦ que le montant r¨¦el pay¨¦ ¨¤ l'agent au titre du loyer mensuel n'¨¦tait pas le montant indiqu¨¦ sur le bail. En outre, le TANU a estim¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait correctement d¨¦termin¨¦ qu'il avait incit¨¦ l'un des demandeurs ¨¤ pr¨¦senter une demande frauduleuse de subvention pour les honoraires d'un agent immobilier.
Le TANU a estim¨¦ que m¨ºme si le fonctionnaire n'avait pas b¨¦n¨¦fici¨¦ personnellement ou...

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...