¹ú²úAV

Judge Colgan

Judge Colgan

Showing 1 - 20 of 244

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que, dans son traitement rigide des preuves relatives au comportement d'AAY, l'UNDT n'a pas tenu compte de ce qu'avait admis AAY lorsqu'il avait ¨¦t¨¦ interrog¨¦ par le BSCI.  Le fait qu'AAY ait choisi de ne pas t¨¦moigner lors de l'audition de l'UNDT montre clairement qu'il s'en tient ¨¤ la d¨¦claration qu'il a faite aux enqu¨ºteurs du BSCI. L'UNDT ¨¦tait tenue de prendre en compte cette preuve incontest¨¦e de sa part dans son ¨¦valuation de la preuve de la faute commise ¨¤ son encontre, d'autant plus qu'il n'a pas choisi de t¨¦moigner davantage pour sa propre d¨¦fense.Le fait...

The Appeals Tribunal found that in its rigid treatment of the evidence in relation to AAY¡¯s conduct, the UNDT failed to have appropriate regard to what had been admitted to by AAY when interviewed by OIOS.  The fact that AAY chose not to testify at the UNDT hearing made it clear that he stood by his statement to the OIOS investigators. The UNDT was required to consider this undisputed evidence from him in its assessment whether the misconduct against him had been proved, more so in circumstances in which he did not elect to testify further in his own defence.  The fact that the three witnesses...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal avait commis une erreur de fait, entra?nant une d¨¦cision manifestement d¨¦raisonnable, lorsqu'il a constat¨¦ qu'une d¨¦cision de licenciement avait ¨¦t¨¦ prise le 1er avril 2022. ? cet ¨¦gard, le TANU a constat¨¦ que la d¨¦cision de placer une note dans le dossier administratif de l'ancien fonctionnaire avait ¨¦t¨¦ prise le 1er avril 2022, mais que la d¨¦cision de licenciement avait en fait ¨¦t¨¦ prise le 11 mars 2022. Par cons¨¦quent, le TANU aurait d? identifier l'une ou l'autre d¨¦cision comme ¨¦tant la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e, mais il a commis une erreur en suivant l...

The UNAT held that the UNDT committed an error of fact, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision, when it found that a termination decision was made on 1 April 2022. In this regard, the UNAT found that while a decision to place a note in the former staff member¡¯s Official Status File (OSF) was made on 1 April 2022, the termination decision was actually taken on 11 March 2022.  Therefore, the UNDT should have identified either decision as the contested decision, but erred in following the former staff member¡¯s assertion that a termination decision was taken on 1 April 2022.

Nevertheless...

Le Tribunal a conclu que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en estimant que l'administration avait ¨¦tabli que l'AAR avait divulgu¨¦ ill¨¦galement des informations confidentielles et qu'il avait ill¨¦galement omis de signaler un conflit d'int¨¦r¨ºts et de se r¨¦cuser.

Le Tribunal d'appel a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que la mesure administrative impos¨¦e ¨¤ AAR ¨¦tait proportionn¨¦e ¨¤ sa faute et que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en accordant des dommages moraux pour le pr¨¦judice subi par AAR en raison du retard excessif dans l'ach¨¨vement de la proc¨¦dure disciplinaire.

Le Tribunal d'appel a donc...

The Appeals Tribunal concluded that the UNDT did not err in finding that the Administration had established that AAR had unlawfully disclosed confidential information and had unlawfully failed to disclose a conflict of interest and recuse himself. 

The Appeals Tribunal was also satisfied that the administrative measure imposed on AAR was proportionate to his misconduct, and that the UNDT did not commit any error in awarding moral damages for the harm AAR incurred due to the undue delay in completing the disciplinary process.

The Appeals Tribunal therefore dismissed the appeals.

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que la d¨¦cision de l'administration de ne pas poursuivre l'enqu¨ºte sur les all¨¦gations de M. Lutfiev contre son ancien chef de cabinet ¨¦tait une d¨¦cision qu'elle ¨¦tait en droit de prendre ¨¦tant donn¨¦ que l'ancien chef de cabinet n'¨¦tait plus un membre du personnel de l'UNRWA.

En outre, le Tribunal d'appel est convaincu que la d¨¦cision du DT de l'UNRWA annulant la cessation de service de M. Lutfiev a ¨¦t¨¦ prise ¨¤ tort.  Le Tribunal du contentieux administratif a appliqu¨¦ une m¨¦thodologie erron¨¦e pour examiner les motifs de la cessation de service de M.

Lutfiev et n...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the Administration¡¯s decision not to investigate further Mr. Lutfiev¡¯s allegations against his former Chief of Staff was one which it was entitled to make given that the former Chief of Staff was no longer an UNRWA staff member.  

Furthermore, the Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the UNRWA DT¡¯s decision rescinding Mr. Lutfiev¡¯s separation from service was decided erroneously.  The Dispute Tribunal applied the wrong methodology to its consideration of the grounds for Mr. Lutfiev¡¯s separation from service and failed to undertake what is known as the four...

? titre pr¨¦liminaire, la Commission d'appel a estim¨¦ que M. Radu n'avait pas d¨¦montr¨¦ l'existence de circonstances exceptionnelles ¨¤ l'appui de sa demande d'anonymat et a donc rejet¨¦ sa demande.
La Commission d'appel a rejet¨¦ l'appel de M. Radu concernant la d¨¦cision n¡ã 1 de la Commission d'appel.  La Commission d'appel a estim¨¦ que m¨ºme si le R¨¨glement du personnel devait ¨ºtre interpr¨¦t¨¦ comme exigeant la consultation de la clinique m¨¦dicale ¨¤ ce moment-l¨¤, le fait que l'Organisation n'ait pas respect¨¦ le R¨¨glement du personnel n'aurait pas rendu la d¨¦cision nulle ab initio.
En ce qui...

As a preliminary matter, the Appeals Tribunal found that Mr. Radu had failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to support his request for anonymity and accordingly dismissed his request. 

The Appeals Board dismissed Mr. Radu¡¯s appeal in relation to Appeals Board Decision No. 1.  The Appeals Tribunal found that even if the Staff Rule was to be interpreted as to require consultation with the Medical Clinic at that time, the Organization¡¯s failure to abide by the Staff Rule would not render the decision void ab initio.

Turning to the appeal against Appeals Board Decision No. 2 to...

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que l'UNDT avait ¨¤ juste titre rejet¨¦ la demande de M. Salon comme irrecevable au motif qu'il n'avait pas ¨¦tabli qu'une d¨¦cision administrative susceptible de recours avait ¨¦t¨¦ prise par l'Organisation et qu'en tout ¨¦tat de cause, il n'avait pas demand¨¦ d'¨¦valuation de la gestion.

Le TANU a not¨¦ que lorsque l'agent avait d¨¦m¨¦nag¨¦ en Caroline du Nord, il n'avait pas cherch¨¦ ¨¤ savoir s'il ¨¦tait ou non tenu de payer l'imp?t sur le revenu de cet ?tat. N¨¦anmoins, le TANU a conclu que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral avait commis une erreur en appliquant un d¨¦lai d'un an ¨¤ sa demande de remboursement de l'imp?t sur le revenu de l'?tat de Caroline du Nord pour la p¨¦riode 2015-2018.
Le TANU a examin¨¦ le libell¨¦ des dispositions pertinentes du Statut et du R¨¨glement du personnel, la doctrine interpr¨¦tative, le r¨¦gime juridique des contributions du personnel, la hi¨¦rarchie des normes...

The UNAT noted that when the staff member had moved to North Carolina, he had not enquired whether or not he was obligated to pay the income tax of that state. Nevertheless, the UNAT concluded that the Secretary-General had erred in applying a one-year time limit to his request for reimbursement of his North Carolina state income tax for 2015-2018.

The UNAT considered the language of the relevant Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, interpretative doctrines, the legal regime of staff assessment, the hierarchy of the relevant norms and the apparent intent of the General Assembly. The UNAT...

Le TANU a examin¨¦ l'¨¦l¨¦ment central du dossier de l'agent, ¨¤ savoir qu'il poss¨¦dait les qualifications acad¨¦miques n¨¦cessaires pour le poste, ce qui n'¨¦tait pas le cas du candidat s¨¦lectionn¨¦.  Le TANU a conclu que les sp¨¦cifications en mati¨¨re d'¨¦ducation figurant dans l'avis de vacance de poste constituaient un seuil minimum, mais pas le facteur d¨¦terminant de la s¨¦lection.  Le TANU a estim¨¦ que l'agent et le candidat s¨¦lectionn¨¦ poss¨¦daient tous deux les qualifications acad¨¦miques requises, m¨ºme s'ils les avaient obtenues par des moyens diff¨¦rents.  Le TANU a rejet¨¦ l'argument selon lequel...

The UNAT considered the central tenet of the staff member¡¯s case, which was that he held the necessary academic qualifications for the role, but that the selected candidate did not.  The UNAT concluded that the educational specifications in the job vacancy announcement were a minimum threshold, but not the determining factor in the selection.  The UNAT held that both the staff member and the selected candidate met the threshold academic qualifications, even though they obtained them by different means.  The UNAT rejected the claim that the ITLOS should not have taken into account that the...

Le TANU a observ¨¦ que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral avait choisi de limiter la port¨¦e de son appel aux seules conclusions du TANU concernant deux des neuf cas de faute pr¨¦sum¨¦e de la part de l'ancien fonctionnaire.  Le TANU a ¨¦galement reconnu que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral soutenait que le TANU avait commis une erreur de droit en appliquant les crit¨¨res juridiques du harc¨¨lement et du harc¨¨lement sexuel aux deux incidents.
N¨¦anmoins, le TANU a estim¨¦ que pour trancher la question en appel, il ne suffisait pas d'appliquer le bon crit¨¨re juridique.  Pour parvenir ¨¤ des conclusions, il ne suffit pas de tenir...

The UNAT observed that the Secretary-General elected to limit the scope of his appeal only against the findings of the UNDT with respect to two of nine instances of alleged misconduct by the former staff member.  The UNAT further acknowledged that the Secretary-General¡¯s contention was that the UNDT erred in law when it applied the legal tests for harassment and sexual harassment to the two incidents.  

Nonetheless, the UNAT held that to determine the issue on appeal required more than simply an application of the correct legal test.  To reach any conclusions requires more than simply...

Le TANU n'a pas trouv¨¦ d'erreur dans le fait que l'UNDT s'est appuy¨¦ sur la communication entre l'agent et son avocat pour ¨¦tablir qu'elle avait fourni de fausses informations dans ses demandes de remboursement de frais m¨¦dicaux.Le TANU a not¨¦ que l'avocat de la fonctionnaire avait volontairement joint le document confidentiel ¨¤ sa demande. Le TANU a observ¨¦ qu'elle n'avait impos¨¦ aucune limite ou r¨¦serve ¨¤ l'utilisation du document par l'UNDT et qu'elle s'y ¨¦tait r¨¦f¨¦r¨¦e ¨¤ de nombreuses reprises au cours de la proc¨¦dure. Le TANU a reconnu qu'elle avait renonc¨¦ ¨¤ son droit ¨¤ la confidentialit¨¦...

The UNAT found no error in the UNDT¡¯s reliance on the communication between the staff member and her attorney when it established that she had submitted false information in her claims for reimbursement for medical expenses. The UNAT noted that her attorney had voluntarily submitted the privileged document as an attachment to her application. The UNAT observed that she had not imposed any limitations or reservations on the UNDT¡¯s use of the document and had referred to it on multiple occasions in the course of the proceedings. The UNAT agreed that she had waived her right to confidentiality...