AV

Agreements, conventions, treaties (etc.)

  • Agreement between ITLOS and the UN
  • Agreement between the UN and ICAO (December 2009/January 2010)
  • Agreement between the UN and ITLOS
  • Agreement between the UN and WMO (18 July 2017)
  • Agreement between the UN and WMO (20 January 2020)
  • Agreement between the United Nations and the Lebanese Republic on the establishment of the STL
  • Agreement between the UNJSPF and IOM (6 March 2006)
  • Agreement concluded between the UN and ICAO (6 January 2010)
  • Agreement on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations concluded between the Swiss Federal Council and the Secretary General of the United Nations on 19 April 1946
  • American Convention on Human Rights of the Organization of American States
  • Convention on International Civil Aviation
  • Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UN
  • Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations
  • Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol
  • European Convention on Human Rights
  • Headquarters Agreement Between the United Nations and the Government of Kenya
  • ICAO Agreement with the UN
  • ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work
  • Inter-Organization Agreement between UNAMID and WFP
  • Inter-Organization Agreement Concerning Transfer, Secondment or Loan of Staff among Organizations applying the United Nations Common System of Salaries and Allowances
  • Inter-Organization Agreement Concerning Transfer, Secondment or Loan of Staff among the Organizations applying the United Nations Common System of Salaries and Allowances
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
  • ISBA/ST/AI/2017/2
  • ISBA/ST/SGB/2020/1/amend 1
  • Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons Especially Women and Children
  • Special Agreement between the UN and the ISA (11 February 2010)
  • Special Agreement between the UN and UNRWA
  • Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service
  • United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime
  • United Nations Convention on the rights of the child
  • Universal Declaration on Human Rights
  • Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
  • WFP Office of Inspections and Investigations (OSDI) Quality Assurance Manual on Investigations
  • Showing 11 - 20 of 82

    UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that Ms. Caucci’s situation differed from the UNDT Judgment in Tran Nguyen (UNDT/2015/002) and therefore it was erroneous for the UNDT to apply such jurisprudence to find that Ms. Caucci had a general service lien with MINUSMA during and after her service with DPO. UNAT held that the rights of staff members on secondment under the Inter-Organization Agreement concerning Transfer, Secondment or Loan of Staff among the Organizations applying the United Nations Common System of Salaries and Allowance, which was at issue in Tran Nguyen...

    UNAT held that the Appellant had no standing to seek consideration by a full bench. UNAT held that to the extent UNDT engaged in a fact-finding exercise of its own, this was not a legitimate exercise of its competence. UNAT held that the Administration’s failure to provide adequate reasons for the contested decision resulted in the contested decision being unlawful. UNAT held that the Administration’s failure to exercise its discretion with regard to carrying out an investigation also rendered the contested decision unlawful. UNAT allowed the appeal in part. UNAT vacated the UNDT Judgment by...

    UNAT held that, since the Appellant was not a staff member of IOM at the time of the Agreement between the UNJSPF and IOM of 6 March 2006, the terms of the Agreement were not applicable to him as, by its terms, the Agreement only covered staff members who were current at the time of the Agreement. UNAT held that the different treatment of IOM staff members was created by the General Assembly. UNAT noted that restoration is an exceptional benefit that cannot be extended by analogy. UNAT held that the Appellant’s claim of inconsistency, unequal treatment, and arbitrariness by the UNJSPB was...

    UNAT held that, as a consequence of paragraph 11 of the Inter-Organisation Agreement, the UN, through UNAMID, undertook to extend the protection of its system of administration of justice to the Appellant in respect of administrative decisions taken by UNAMID during the term of the Loan Agreement. UNAT noted that under this provision, the Appellant could only appeal against the administrative decisions of WFP before ILOAT. UNAT held that, without access to the administration of justice system within the UN, the Appellant would have no right to an effective remedy from the competent tribunal in...

    UNAT held that the Appellant had accepted the conditions of the RLA, which stated that “the loaned employee shall return to the releasing agency upon completion or termination of his assignment with UNAMID and that no offer of continuing employment shall be made to him by UNAMID without consulting the releasing agency”. UNAT held that the Appellant had had a valid employment contract with WFP, and he did not fulfil the conditions for termination under that same agreement. UNAT noted that the Appellant did not formally initiate the transfer procedure and/or termination. UNAT held that UNDT had...

    UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Ms Johnson. UNAT agreed with UNDT’s analysis and held that the decision to deny the staff member a refund of the US income tax on her salary and emoluments was unlawful. UNAT recalled that the US grants foreign tax credits in respect of income tax paid by one of its nationals or permanent residents to another State to relieve the effects of double taxation. UNAT held that the exclusion of such credits as payment would not only contravene the principle of equality of treatment among staff members if staff members from the...

    UNAT held that the appeal was not based on any of the required grounds. UNAT held that UNRWA DT properly discharged its duty to examine whether the procedure laid down in the applicable Staff Regulations and Rules had been followed and whether the Appellant had been given fair and adequate consideration. UNAT held that UNRWA DT correctly placed upon the Appellant the onus of showing by clear and convincing evidence that he had been denied a fair chance of being promoted. UNAT agreed with UNRWA DT’s observation that it was not enough for the Appellant to merely allege favouritism and yet...

    As a preliminary matter, UNAT dismissed the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing. On the merits, UNAT noted that he argued the same arguments that he put before UNRWA DT. UNAT found that UNRWA DT gave careful and fair consideration to the Appellant’s arguments and weighed them against the facts of the case. UNAT found no fault with UNRWA DT’s decision and held that the Appellant did not demonstrate that UNRWA DT erred in fact or law. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment.

    UNAT preliminarily rejected the request for an oral hearing since the issue to be determined was clear from the papers filed in the appeal. UNAT held that, other than repeating his arguments before the UNRWA DT, the Appellant had not detailed the alleged instances which, according to him, resulted in a manifestly unreasonable decision. UNAT held that the claims of errors of fact on the part of UNRWA DT, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision, were unsustainable. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err when it found, from the contents of the 2 September 2009 communication to the Appellant...