Â鶹APP

Ms. Pakkala filed an appeal. UNAT found that the decision to impose the administrative measures on Ms. Pakkala was a lawful and reasonable exercise of discretion.

The letter of the Director, DHR clearly set out the rationale for imposing the administrative measures, i.e. that the investigative process had surfaced a pattern of behavior exhibited by Ms. Pakkala over time which was cause for concern and justified the administrative measures. While the Director, DHR found the evidence of alleged harassment was not clear and convincing, in her opinion there were reasonable grounds to believe...

La question essentielle de la d¨¦termination en appel est de savoir si l'ANDT a correctement jug¨¦ que l'inconduite pr¨¦sum¨¦e de cr¨¦er un environnement de travail hostile et de donner des cadeaux ¨¦tait prouv¨¦e conform¨¦ment ¨¤ la norme de preuves claires et convaincantes. En d'autres termes, les preuves ont-elles ¨¦tabli l'inconduite pr¨¦sum¨¦e ¨¤ un degr¨¦ ¨¦lev¨¦ de probabilit¨¦? ? son essence, cette affaire implique donc des diff¨¦rends de fait fortement contest¨¦s quant ¨¤ savoir si l'AAC s'est conduit d'une mani¨¨re abusive et a cr¨¦¨¦ un environnement de travail hostile. L'administration dit qu'il l'a fait...

The essential question for determination on appeal is whether the UNDT correctly held that the alleged misconduct of creating a hostile work environment and giving of gifts was proved in accordance with the standard of clear and convincing evidence. In other words, did the evidence establish the alleged misconduct to a high degree of probability? At its essence, therefore, this case involves strongly contested disputes of fact about whether AAC conducted himself in a manner that was abusive and created a hostile working environment. The Administration says he did. AAC strongly denies it. Thus...

Unat a jug¨¦ que la violation incontest¨¦e de la confidentialit¨¦ dans le processus de s¨¦lection fournissait des motifs rationnels pour la d¨¦cision d'annulation. Unat a soutenu que le fait que l'appelant avait acc¨¨s ¨¤ des informations sur son score de test et qu'il cherchait peut-¨ºtre ¨¤ influencer la d¨¦cision par l'interm¨¦diaire du responsable du recrutement, a rendu l'exercice de s¨¦lection probl¨¦matique et insatisfaisant. Unat a jug¨¦ que la perception a ¨¦t¨¦ in¨¦vitablement cr¨¦¨¦e que l'appelant ¨¦tait de mani¨¨re inappropri¨¦e avec l'acc¨¨s ¨¤ des informations sur une d¨¦cision concernant ses int¨¦r¨ºts...

UNAT held that the undisputed breach of confidentiality in the selection process provided rational grounds for the cancellation decision. UNAT held that the fact that the Appellant had access to information about his test score and that he was perhaps seeking to influence the decision through the hiring manager, rendered the selection exercise problematic and unsatisfactory. UNAT held that the perception was unavoidably created that the Appellant was inappropriately favoured with access to information about a decision concerning his interests and in respect of which he enjoyed no authority...

M. Krioutchkov a fait appel. Unat a constat¨¦ que l'UNDT soutenait correctement que le calendrier du test ¨¦crit ¨¦tait justifiable en ce que la maintenance du test ¨¤ une heure d¨¦finie dans le monde ¨¦tait une mani¨¨re rationnelle d'¨¦viter les fuites des mat¨¦riaux de test. L'inconv¨¦nient de l'administration des diff¨¦rents calendriers de tests l'emportait sur l'inconv¨¦nient de M. Krioutchkov n¨¦cessaire pour ajuster son horaire. La d¨¦cision de planification ¨¦tait en cons¨¦quence raisonnable. De plus, ayant refus¨¦ de participer ¨¤ l'examen ¨¦crit, M. Krioutchkov a ¨¦t¨¦ emp¨ºch¨¦ de contester la d¨¦cision de...

Mr. Krioutchkov appealed. UNAT found that the UNDT correctly held that the timing of the written test was justifiable in that holding the test at a set hour worldwide was a rational way of avoiding leaks of the test materials. The inconvenience to the Administration of accommodating different test schedules outweighed the inconvenience of Mr. Krioutchkov being required to adjust his schedule. The scheduling decision was accordingly reasonable. Moreover, having refused to participate in the written examination, Mr. Krioutchkov was estopped from challenging the non-selection decision. UNAT found...

Le secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral a fait appel. Unat a trouv¨¦ "discutable" la conclusion de l'UNDT selon laquelle les rapports d'enqu¨ºte n'¨¦taient pas approfondis ou proc¨¦duraux. L'UNAT ¨¦tait convaincu que la mani¨¨re dont l'enqu¨ºte a ¨¦t¨¦ men¨¦e ¨¦tait ad¨¦quate aux fins d'une ¨¦valuation pr¨¦liminaire. Unat a constat¨¦ que, en vue du fait que Mme Rehman n'avait pas ¨¦t¨¦ donn¨¦e ou autoris¨¦e aux rapports, l'ordre contest¨¦ de l'UND a essentiellement oblig¨¦ l'OIAI ¨¤ fournir une d¨¦cision ¨¦crite et motiv¨¦e exposant les conclusions et les raisons de son ¨¦valuation selon lesquelles les plaintes ne doit pas ¨ºtre renvoy¨¦...

The Secretary-General appealed. UNAT found "questionable" the UNDT¡¯s finding that the investigation reports were not thorough or procedurally fair. UNAT was satisfied that the manner in which the inquiry was conducted was adequate for the purposes of a preliminary assessment. UNAT found that in view of the fact that Ms. Rehman was not given or entitled to the reports, the impugned order of the UNDT essentially required the OIAI to provide a written, reasoned decision setting out the findings and reasons for its assessment that the complaints should not be referred to an investigation. The...

Non pas d'accord et invers¨¦ le jugement de l'UND. Le Tribunal d'appel a expliqu¨¦ que la consid¨¦ration prioritaire n'est accord¨¦e qu'aux membres du personnel redondants qui tiennent des nominations permanentes qui ont la comp¨¦tence et les comp¨¦tences relatives pour un emploi particulier. La consid¨¦ration prioritaire est ainsi fond¨¦e sur les candidats qui s'¨¦tablissent d'abord comme ¨¦ligibles et adapt¨¦s ¨¤ un poste. Ce n'est qu'alors que la consid¨¦ration prioritaire fonctionne pour permettre leur s¨¦lection. Il faudrait autrement que les membres du personnel redondants d¨¦tiennent des nominations...

UNAT disagreed and reversed the UNDT Judgment. The Appeals Tribunal explained that priority consideration is afforded only to redundant staff members holding permanent appointments who have the relative competence and skills for a particular job. Priority consideration is thus premised on candidates first establishing themselves as eligible and suitable for a position. Only then does priority consideration operate to permit their selection. To hold otherwise would require preference to be given to redundant staff members holding permanent appointments despite their lack of skills to...

Le membre du personnel demande la r¨¦vision du jugement en raison du fait que lui et Unat n'¨¦taient pas au courant de divers jugements de l'UNRWA DT traitant des affaires de blessures incurables. UNAT a rejet¨¦ la demande de r¨¦vision en raison du fait que la nature de la blessure, incurre ou non des services, n'avait aucune incidence sur le fait que le membre du personnel avait ¨¦t¨¦ exclu de recevoir une indemnisation. La raison pour laquelle il s'est vu refuser l'indemnisation ¨¦tait qu'il n'a pas attribu¨¦ son droit d'action, et non en raison de la nature de sa blessure, incurre par le service ou...

The staff member applies for revision of Judgment on account that both he and UNAT were unaware of various UNRWA DT Judgments dealing with service-incurred injury cases. UNAT rejected the application for revision on account that the nature of the injury, whether service-incurred or not, had no bearing on whether the staff member was debarred from receiving compensation. The reason he was denied compensation was because he did not assign his right of action, not because of the nature of his injury, service-incurred or not. Furthermore, UNAT also reasoned prior UNRWA DT judgments do not...

Unat a soutenu que l'UNDT avait commis une erreur ¨¤ la fois en ne permettant pas ¨¤ l'appelant d'appeler un t¨¦moin (AA) et dans les conclusions incorrectes qu'elle a tir¨¦es de ses preuves de ou?-dire. Unat a jug¨¦ que, dans la mesure o¨´ BB (un membre du personnel non UN) ¨¦tait un t¨¦moin adverse ¨¤ l'appelant, l'¨¦chec du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral ¨¤ assurer sa fr¨¦quentation avant que les UND ne permettent une inf¨¦rence d¨¦favorable qui a consid¨¦rablement nui ¨¤ la cr¨¦dibilit¨¦ et Fiabilit¨¦ de ses all¨¦gations dans le rapport d'enqu¨ºte de l'OIOS. Unat a soutenu que peu de poids pouvait ¨ºtre attach¨¦ ¨¤ la preuve...

UNAT held that the UNDT erred both in not permitting the Appellant to call a witness (AA) and in the incorrect conclusions it drew from her hearsay evidence. UNAT held that, to the extent that BB (a non-UN staff member) was a witness adverse to the Appellant, the failure of the Secretary-General to secure her attendance before the UNDT permitted an adverse inference which detracted considerably from the credibility and reliability of her allegations in the OIOS investigation report. UNAT held that little weight could be attached to the evidence of two unidentified UN staff members, to whom the...

Unat a jug¨¦ que la d¨¦cision de UNDT que la demande concernant la d¨¦cision non renouvelable ¨¦tait sans objet parce que la d¨¦cision non renouvelable ne s'est jamais concr¨¦tis¨¦e ¨¦tait correcte. Unat a jug¨¦ que la d¨¦cision non renouvelable avait ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pass¨¦e par la s¨¦paration de l'appelant pour des raisons de sant¨¦ et que l'appelant n'avait pas contest¨¦ la d¨¦cision r¨¦elle qui a finalement entra?n¨¦ la cessation de son emploi. Unat a jug¨¦ que UNDT n'avait aucune obligation d'examiner les avantages de la d¨¦cision remplac¨¦e une fois qu'elle a correctement constat¨¦ que la demande ¨¦tait th¨¦orique. Unat...

UNAT held that the decision of UNDT that the application in relation to the non-renewal decision was moot because the non-renewal decision never materialised was correct. UNAT held that the non-renewal decision was overtaken by the Appellant¡¯s separation for health reasons and that the Appellant had not challenged the actual decision that ultimately resulted in the termination of her employment. UNAT held that UNDT had no obligation to consider the merits of the superseded decision once it correctly found that the application was moot. UNAT held that UNDT did not err in finding that the...

Unat a consid¨¦r¨¦ un appel du secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral. Unat a jug¨¦ que UNDT avait commis une erreur dans la conclusion de la conclusion que l'administration n'¨¦tait pas l¨¦galement autoris¨¦e ¨¤ consid¨¦rer l'anciennet¨¦ ou le progr¨¨s de carri¨¨re dans le processus de s¨¦lection. Unat a estim¨¦ qu'il ¨¦tait tout ¨¤ fait appropri¨¦ de faire un choix entre deux candidats recommand¨¦s en partie sur leur anciennet¨¦ et leur temps respectives d¨¦j¨¤ purg¨¦es ¨¤ une note particuli¨¨re. Unat a jug¨¦ que Undt a ¨¦galement commis une erreur en inversant essentiellement le fardeau de la preuve en exigeant que le Secr¨¦taire...

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that UNDT erred in law in finding that the Administration was not legally allowed to consider seniority or career advancement in the selection process. UNAT held that it was entirely proper to make a choice between two recommended candidates based partly on their respective seniority and time already served at a particular grade. UNAT held that UNDT also erred in essentially reversing the burden of proof by requiring the Secretary-General to show that the factors considered were explicitly provided for in the legal framework rather...

Mme Reilly a d¨¦pos¨¦ une demande de correction. Unat a constat¨¦ que sa demande ¨¦tait en substance ¨¤ la fois une demande de correction et de r¨¦vision. UNAT a rejet¨¦ la demande. Unat a jug¨¦ que les corrections demand¨¦es n'¨¦taient en aucune pertinence mat¨¦rielle pour le r¨¦sultat et le raisonnement du jugement. En ce qui concerne une correction demand¨¦e, Unat a not¨¦ que le secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral a conc¨¦d¨¦ qu'il avait fourni le tribunal d'appel avec des informations incorrectes - Mme Reilly ¨¦tait en cong¨¦ sp¨¦cial avec un salaire pendant quatre au lieu de six jours en octobre 2019. Unat, cependant...