����AV

There are two elements that must be established for a claim under Appendix D, one is the medical assessment of whether the claimant suffered from the injury or illness as alleged. The other is the non-medical factual determination whether the illness or injury was attributable to the performance of official duties on behalf of the Organization. The obtaining, handling, review, analysis and dissemination of any form of material to be used in a matter as evidence must be done in compliance with some basic rules to ensure that basic principles of fairness and due process are upheld, particularly where it is alleged that the material was tampered with as in the Applicant’s case. The Respondent’s failure to provide critical CCTV video footage evidence to the Applicant prejudiced his right to a fair and reasonable consideration of his claim and was unlawful. The Tribunal found that the ABCC failed to consider relevant matters by not further exploring the connection or lack thereof between an incident and the Applicant’s injuries. The Tribunal found that the ABCC improperly considered the United Nations Claims Board’s recommendation and related documentation in reviewing the Applicant’s Appendix D claim. There is no express provision in the law requiring the Controller to make a distinct pronouncement based on an ABCC recommendation. Simply referring to and approving a reasoned recommendation by the ABCC was sufficient.