The Tribunal found that the decision to place the Applicant on ALWP was lawful, reasonable and proportionate, and that the SRSG reasonably exercised his authority to protect the work of the fact-finding panel (pursuant to sec. 11.3(b) of ST/AI/2017/1) and to avoid any prejudice to the interests and reputation of the Organization (pursuant to sec. 11.3(c) of ST/AI/2017/1). The Applicant failed to discharge the burden of establishing that the contested decision was arbitrary or capricious, motivated by prejudice or other extraneous factors, or was flawed by procedural irregularity or error of...
Rule 10.4(a)
-
9.8(c)
1
-
Annex I
6
-
Annex II
1
-
Annex III
2
-
Appendix B
1
-
Appendix C
1
-
Appendix D
46
-
Article 3.9(g)
1
-
Article 4.17(b)
1
-
Chapter IV
1
-
Chapter X
3
-
Chapter XI
6
-
Disposition 9.6(c)(iii)
0
-
Provisional Rule 11.1
1
-
Rule 1
2
-
Rule 1.1
2
-
Rule 1.1(c)
2
-
Rule 1.1(j)
1
-
Rule 1.2
29
-
Rule 1.2(a)
12
-
Rule 1.2(b)
26
-
Rule 1.2(c)
28
-
Rule 1.2(d)
1
-
Rule 1.2(e)
21
-
Rule 1.2(f)
51
-
Rule 1.2(g)
11
-
Rule 1.2(h)
1
-
Rule 1.2(i)
4
-
Rule 1.2(j)
1
-
Rule 1.2(k)
4
-
Rule 1.2(p)
2
-
Rule 1.2(q)
11
-
Rule 1.2(r)
1
-
Rule 1.2(s)
1
-
Rule 1.2(t)
4
-
Rule 1.3
5
-
Rule 1.3(a)
1
-
Rule 1.5
3
-
Rule 1.5(a)
11
-
Rule 1.5(c)
1
-
Rule 1.6
0
-
Rule 1.7
4
-
Rule 1.9
1
-
Rule 10
2
-
Rule 10.1
28
-
Rule 10.1(a)
45
-
Rule 10.1(b)
3
-
Rule 10.1(c)
10
-
Rule 10.2
37
-
Rule 10.2(a)
26
-
Rule 10.2(a)(i)
8
-
Rule 10.2(a)(ii)
6
-
Rule 10.2(a)(ix)
13
-
Rule 10.2(a)(v)
4
-
Rule 10.2(a)(vii)
3
-
Rule 10.2(a)(viii)
36
-
Rule 10.2(b)
10
-
Rule 10.2(b)(i-iii)
1
-
Rule 10.2(b)(i)
3
-
Rule 10.2(b)(iii)
3
-
Rule 10.2(c)
4
-
Rule 10.2(vii)
1
-
Rule 10.3
23
-
Rule 10.3(a)
18
-
Rule 10.3(b)
41
-
Rule 10.3(c)
4
-
Rule 10.4
27
-
Rule 10.4(a)
4
-
Rule 10.5
4
-
Rule 101.1
2
-
Rule 101.2
2
-
Rule 101.2(b)
1
-
Rule 101.2(c)
1
-
Rule 101.2(d)
2
-
Rule 101.2(p)
1
-
Rule 101.3
6
-
Rule 101.3(a)
1
-
Rule 103.12
1
-
Rule 103.15
1
-
Rule 103.20(b)
1
-
Rule 104.11
1
-
Rule 104.12
4
-
Rule 104.12(b)(ii)
1
-
Rule 104.12(b)(iii)
5
-
Rule 104.12(c)
1
-
Rule 104.13
11
-
Rule 104.14
1
-
Rule 104.14(a)(ii)
1
-
Rule 104.15
1
-
Rule 104.15(b)(ii)
1
-
Rule 104.3
3
-
Rule 104.3(a)
1
-
Rule 104.3(b)
1
-
Rule 104.7
1
-
Rule 104.7(c)
1
-
Rule 104.8
1
-
Rule 105.1(c)
1
-
Rule 105.2
3
-
Rule 105.2(a)
2
-
Rule 105.3
1
-
Rule 107.20(i)
1
-
Rule 107.9
1
-
Rule 108.1
1
-
Rule 109.1(c)
5
-
Rule 109.1(c)(i)
1
-
Rule 109.3
2
-
Rule 109.4(d)
1
-
Rule 109.7
1
-
Rule 109.7(a)
1
-
Rule 11
4
-
Rule 11.1
6
-
Rule 11.1(a)
2
-
Rule 11.1(c)
3
-
Rule 11.2
171
-
Rule 11.2 (c)
36
-
Rule 11.2 (d)
6
-
Rule 11.2(a)
157
-
Rule 11.2(b)
63
-
Rule 11.2(c)
166
-
Rule 11.2(d)
14
-
Rule 11.3
4
-
Rule 11.3(b)(i)
2
-
Rule 11.3(c)
1
-
Rule 11.3(ii)
1
-
Rule 11.4
40
-
Rule 11.4(a)
26
-
Rule 11.4(b)
7
-
Rule 11.4(c)
3
-
Rule 11.4(d)
4
-
Rule 11.4(g)
2
-
Rule 11.5(d)
1
-
Rule 110.1
7
-
Rule 110.2
3
-
Rule 110.2(a)
1
-
Rule 110.3
6
-
Rule 110.4
7
-
Rule 110.4(b)
1
-
Rule 110.4(b)(i)
1
-
Rule 110.7(b)
1
-
Rule 110.7(d)
1
-
Rule 111.1
2
-
Rule 111.2.2
1
-
Rule 111.2(a)
9
-
Rule 111.2(a)(i)
2
-
Rule 111.2(f)
2
-
Rule 112.2(b)
2
-
Rule 112.3
1
-
Rule 12.3
6
-
Rule 12.3(b)
22
-
Rule 13.1
20
-
Rule 13.1(a)
4
-
Rule 13.1(c)
1
-
Rule 13.1(d)
17
-
Rule 13.1(e)
3
-
Rule 13.1(f)
1
-
Rule 13.11
1
-
Rule 13.2
1
-
Rule 13.4
5
-
Rule 14
1
-
Rule 14(b)(ii)
1
-
Rule 17
2
-
Rule 2.1
8
-
Rule 204.2
1
-
Rule 3.1
5
-
Rule 3.1(b)
1
-
Rule 3.10
10
-
Rule 3.10(a)
4
-
Rule 3.10(b)
6
-
Rule 3.11(a)
10
-
Rule 3.13
4
-
Rule 3.14
2
-
Rule 3.14(a)
1
-
Rule 3.15
3
-
Rule 3.15(ii)
1
-
Rule 3.16
3
-
Rule 3.17
4
-
Rule 3.17(c)
1
-
Rule 3.17(ii)
5
-
Rule 3.18
5
-
Rule 3.18(a)
1
-
Rule 3.18(b)
1
-
Rule 3.18(c)
4
-
Rule 3.18(c)(ii)
3
-
Rule 3.18(c)(iii)
2
-
Rule 3.18(e)
1
-
Rule 3.19
1
-
Rule 3.19(a)
2
-
Rule 3.19(g)
2
-
Rule 3.2(g)
0
-
Rule 3.3(a)
2
-
Rule 3.4
1
-
Rule 3.4(a)
2
-
Rule 3.4(e)
1
-
Rule 3.5
1
-
Rule 3.6
3
-
Rule 3.6(a)
2
-
Rule 3.6(a)(iv)
1
-
Rule 3.6(b)
1
-
Rule 3.6(d)
1
-
Rule 3.7
2
-
Rule 3.7(c)
1
-
Rule 3.9
10
-
Rule 3.9(b)
1
-
Rule 301
1
-
Rule 301.3(i)
1
-
Rule 304.4
2
-
Rule 309.3
1
-
Rule 309.4
1
-
Rule 4
1
-
Rule 4.1
8
-
Rule 4.12
15
-
Rule 4.12(a)
3
-
Rule 4.12(b)
1
-
Rule 4.12(c)
7
-
Rule 4.12(c)
0
-
Rule 4.13
20
-
Rule 4.13(a)
3
-
Rule 4.13(b)
3
-
Rule 4.13(c)
61
-
Rule 4.14
4
-
Rule 4.14 (b)
1
-
Rule 4.14(b)
7
-
Rule 4.15
5
-
Rule 4.16
5
-
Rule 4.16
0
-
Rule 4.16
0
-
Rule 4.16(b)(i)
1
-
Rule 4.16(b)(ii)
2
-
Rule 4.17
15
-
Rule 4.17(c)
1
-
Rule 4.18
10
-
Rule 4.18(a)
1
-
Rule 4.18(c)
1
-
Rule 4.19
1
-
Rule 4.2
4
-
Rule 4.3
5
-
Rule 4.4
3
-
Rule 4.4(a)
3
-
Rule 4.4(b)
3
-
Rule 4.5
6
-
Rule 4.5(a)
1
-
Rule 4.5(b)
1
-
Rule 4.5(c)
7
-
Rule 4.5(d)
1
-
Rule 4.6
1
-
Rule 4.7
6
-
Rule 4.7(a)
3
-
Rule 4.8
16
-
Rule 4.8(b)
1
-
Rule 4.9(a)
2
-
Rule 5.1(e)(ii)
5
-
Rule 5.2
7
-
Rule 5.2(c)
1
-
Rule 5.3
9
-
Rule 5.3(c)
1
-
Rule 5.3(e)
1
-
Rule 5.3(f)
7
-
Rule 5.3(ii)
1
-
Rule 6.1
2
-
Rule 6.2
21
-
Rule 6.2(a)
3
-
Rule 6.2(b)
1
-
Rule 6.2(b)(ii)
2
-
Rule 6.2(f)
4
-
Rule 6.2(g)
2
-
Rule 6.2(j)
2
-
Rule 6.2(k)
2
-
Rule 6.2(k)(iii)
2
-
Rule 6.29b)(i)
0
-
Rule 6.3(a)
3
-
Rule 6.4
1
-
Rule 6.5
5
-
Rule 6.6
5
-
Rule 7
1
-
Rule 7.1
7
-
Rule 7.1(a)
2
-
Rule 7.1(a)(iv)
1
-
Rule 7.1(b)
1
-
Rule 7.10
4
-
Rule 7.14
2
-
Rule 7.14(d)
1
-
Rule 7.15
5
-
Rule 7.15(h)
1
-
Rule 7.16
1
-
Rule 7.2
1
-
Rule 7.4
2
-
Rule 7.6
1
-
Rule 8.1
8
-
Rule 8.1(a)
1
-
Rule 8.1(f)
11
-
Rule 8.2
1
-
Rule 9
2
-
Rule 9.1
6
-
Rule 9.1(a)
1
-
Rule 9.11
9
-
Rule 9.11 (a) (vii)
0
-
Rule 9.12
4
-
Rule 9.2
2
-
Rule 9.2(a)
1
-
Rule 9.2(b)
1
-
Rule 9.2(c)
1
-
Rule 9.3
6
-
Rule 9.3(a)(i)
2
-
Rule 9.3(c)(i)
2
-
Rule 9.4
39
-
Rule 9.5
1
-
Rule 9.6
40
-
Rule 9.6
1
-
Rule 9.6 (c)(i)
1
-
Rule 9.6.(b)
1
-
Rule 9.6(a)
17
-
Rule 9.6(b)
14
-
Rule 9.6(c)
12
-
Rule 9.6(c)(i)
8
-
Rule 9.6(c)(ii)
7
-
Rule 9.6(c)(iii)
1
-
Rule 9.6(c)(v)
1
-
Rule 9.6(e)
53
-
Rule 9.6(f)
14
-
Rule 9.6(g)
3
-
Rule 9.6(h)
1
-
Rule 9.6(i)
1
-
Rule 9.7
12
-
Rule 9.7(a)
1
-
Rule 9.7(b)
1
-
Rule 9.7(d)
3
-
Rule 9.8
9
-
Rule 9.8(a)
4
-
Rule 9.9
7
Showing 1 - 4 of 4
Fraud, misrepresentation and false certification
Due process
Fact-finding investigation
Disciplinary matters / misconduct
Investigation
The Tribunal found that the use of the investigation report was not subject to the confidentiality agreement between the parties; it was an autonomous document, which was lawfully used in court. The decision did not constitute a disciplinary measure. It was taken pending the completion of the disciplinary process and was without prejudice to the Applicant’s rights. More than one circumstance warranting the placement of the staff member on ALWP occurred. The Applicant could be dismissed or separated from service with the United Nations for breach of the duty of trust and confidence, in...
Disciplinary matters / misconduct
Investigation (see category: Investigation)
Jurisdiction / receivability (UNDT or first instance)
Management Evaluation
Subject matter (ratione materiae)
Temporal (ratione temporis)
Management Evaluation
Time limit
Non-renewal
Separation from service
Expiration of appointment (see also, Non-renewal)
UNAT held that the UNDT properly dismissed the Appellant’s claims in relation to the non-renewal of his appointment and his reassignment as not receivable as they were time-barred. On the cancellation of his administrative leave, UNAT held that UNDT correctly found that there was no adverse decision affecting his conditions of employment. UNAT held that the decision to terminate the administrative leave and not to pursue disciplinary action was not an administrative decision in that it did not have any adverse legal consequences or impact for the Appellant. UNAT held that the decision to...
Burden of proof
Discrimination and other improper motives
Jurisdiction / receivability (UNDT or first instance)
Reassignment or transfer
UNDT found the application materially receivable as it concerned a decision that was appropriately the subject of judicial review. UNDT found that the decision to reassign the Applicant rather than place her on administrative leave, was taken balancing her best interest with those of the Organization. These reasons were supported by evidence. The Tribunal further held that the Applicant failed to meet her burden of proving any improper motive, irregularity or unlawfulness on the part of the Respondent in the decision to re-assign her duties. UNDT therefore held that the presumption of...