国产AV

2015-688

Showing 1 - 1 of 1

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT found merit in the Secretary-General鈥檚 submission that UNDT was not competent to determine or assume that the injury was service-related; to assume that there was a likelihood of the Advisory Board on Compensation Claims (ABCC) would have reached a different conclusion had it followed the correct procedure; that the ABCC made its recommendations based on uncertain facts and inference which were derived, improbably, from the absence of evidence; that after the second accident, the staff member was permanently disabled and unable to work...