The application is partly non-receivable and, is rejected on the merits. The Applicant’s objection to General Assembly’s decision to restructure the D-1 level position and to submit the selection of the Secretary of the Board to a competitive process by the Succession Planning Committee is not reviewable by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the Applicant was afforded full and fair consideration and the non-selection decision was lawful. The Tribunal found that the USG/DMSPC lawfully assigned the Applicant to a suitable position in the Secretariat in order to retain his employment at the D...
Article 11.2(c)
-
Article 1
2
-
Article 10
14
-
Article 10.2
45
-
Article 10.3
3
-
Article 10.4
16
-
Article 10.5
217
-
Article 10.5(a)
86
-
Article 10.5(b)
121
-
Article 10.6
72
-
Article 10.7
31
-
Article 10.9
5
-
Article 105
1
-
Article 11
7
-
Article 11.1
13
-
Article 11.2
2
-
Article 11.2(c)
2
-
Article 11.3
23
-
Article 11.4
1
-
Article 11.5
2
-
Article 11.6
15
-
Article 12
6
-
Article 12.1
24
-
Article 12.2
3
-
Article 12.3
13
-
Article 12.4
13
-
Article 12.5
1
-
Article 15.7
1
-
Article 18.2
2
-
Article 18.3
3
-
Article 19
5
-
Article 2
93
-
Article 2.1
220
-
Article 2.1(b)
10
-
Article 2.1(c)
4
-
Article 2.1(d)
2
-
Article 2.1(e)
4
-
Article 2.2
124
-
Article 2.3
5
-
Article 2.4
2
-
Article 2.5
11
-
Article 2.6
22
-
Article 2.7
9
-
Article 2.7(b)
2
-
Article 2.8
2
-
Article 2(a)
4
-
Article 2(b)
1
-
Article 3
29
-
Article 3.1
65
-
Article 3.1(a)
8
-
Article 3.1(b)
20
-
Article 3.1(c)
2
-
Article 32
1
-
Article 4.2
1
-
Article 4.5
1
-
Article 4.9
3
-
Article 6
3
-
Article 7
9
-
Article 7.1
4
-
Article 7.2
3
-
Article 7.2(e)
1
-
Article 7.2(h)
1
-
Article 7.2(i)
1
-
Article 7.5
7
-
Article 7(b)
1
-
Article 8
110
-
Article 8.1
127
-
Article 8.1(a)
1
-
Article 8.1(a)
24
-
Article 8.1(b)
12
-
Article 8.1(b)(ii)
1
-
Article 8.1(c)
157
-
Article 8.1(d)
21
-
Article 8.1(d)(i)
27
-
Article 8.1(d)(i)–(iv)
2
-
Article 8.1(d)(i)(a)
19
-
Article 8.1(d)(i)(b)
14
-
Article 8.1(d)(ii)
18
-
Article 8.1(d)(iii)
1
-
Article 8.1(d)(iv)
6
-
Article 8.1(i)
3
-
Article 8.1(i)(b)
2
-
Article 8.1(ii)
3
-
Article 8.1(ii)(c)
1
-
Article 8.2
15
-
Article 8.2(b)
1
-
Article 8.2(d)(i)
1
-
Article 8.3
163
-
Article 8.3(a)
1
-
Article 8.4
43
-
Article 8.5
3
-
Article 8.6
1
-
Article 8(a)
1
-
Article 8(c)
1
-
Article 8(d)(i)
1
-
Article 8(d)(ii)
2
-
Article 9
9
-
Article 9.1
8
-
Article 9.1(b)
1
-
Article 9.2
6
-
Article 9.3
4
-
Article 9.4
1
Showing 1 - 2 of 2
TEST -Rename- Benefits and entitlements-45
Jurisdiction / receivability (UNDT or first instance)
Management Evaluation
The decision to refuse further medical evacuation was first notified to the Applicant on 15 July 2014 but he did not request management evaluation until 29 January 2017 after later requests for medical evacuation had been refused. The application was not receivable because subsequent reiterations of the same decision did not have the effect of resetting the clock for management evaluation.