Â鶹APP

L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que la Commission paritaire de recours de l'ISA avait d¨¦termin¨¦ ¨¤ juste titre que Mme Nguyen : (1) n'avait pas droit ¨¤ une allocation de rapatriement de l'ISA ; (2) n'a pas droit au paiement des cong¨¦s annuels accumul¨¦s non utilis¨¦s, qui ont ¨¦t¨¦ transf¨¦r¨¦s ¨¤ son employeur ult¨¦rieur, l'UNRWA ; 3¡ã n'a pas droit au remboursement de certaines d¨¦penses li¨¦es aux fournitures scolaires; et (4) n'avait pas droit ¨¤ l'indemnit¨¦ de non-d¨¦m¨¦nagement, qui ¨¦tait une prestation interrompue. Cependant, l'UNAT a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que l'ISA JAB avait commis une erreur en refusant ¨¤ Mme Nguyen une...

L'UNAT a jug¨¦ que les questions factuelles et juridiques r¨¦sultant de cet appel ont d¨¦j¨¤ ¨¦t¨¦ clairement d¨¦finies par les parties et qu'il n'est pas n¨¦cessaire de clarifier davantage par le biais d'une audience orale. L'UNAT a constat¨¦ que l'UNDT n'avait commis aucune erreur lorsqu'elle a constat¨¦ que la demande du membre du personnel ¨¦tait une rationne materiae irr¨¦couvrable. L'UNAT a not¨¦ que l'UNDT avait correctement jug¨¦ que le membre du personnel avait connaissance du pr¨¦sum¨¦ licenciement constructif ¨¤ la date qu'il a r¨¦it¨¦r¨¦ sa d¨¦mission, soit au plus tard lorsque l'UNICEF a accept¨¦ sa...

The UNAT held that the ISA JAB was correct in determining that Ms. Nguyen was: (1) not entitled to a repatriation grant from ISA; (2) not entitled to payment for unused accrued annual leave, which was transferred to her subsequent employer, UNRWA; (3) not entitled to reimbursement for certain school supply expenses; and (4) not entitled to the non-removal allowance, which was a discontinued benefit. However, the UNAT also held that the ISA JAB erred in denying Ms. Nguyen a relocation grant, and erred in denying her the travel expenses and travel time from Kingston, Jamaica to New York. The...

Unat a jug¨¦ que la d¨¦cision de l'administration de suspendre l'examen de l'initiation d'un processus disciplinaire et de reprendre ¨¤ la place si l'appelant est r¨¦approvisi¨¦ par l'organisation ¨¤ l'avenir, ne constituait pas une d¨¦cision administrative appelable aux fins de l'article 2 (1) (a) de la loi UNDT, car il n'a pas produit d'impact n¨¦gatif actuel et direct sur les conditions de nomination de Mme Mugo. Unat a jug¨¦ que tout ce que l'administration avait fait ¨¦tait de savoir si l'appelant ¨¦tait pr¨ºt ¨¤ coop¨¦rer dans un processus disciplinaire. Par cons¨¦quent, comme aucune all¨¦gation ¨¦crite...

L'UNAT a rejet¨¦ l'appel. L'UNAT a jug¨¦ que l'UNT ne s'est pas tromp¨¦ en concluant que M. Reiterer avait commis l'inconduite pr¨¦sum¨¦e. L'UNAT a convenu de la conclusion de l'UNDT que les faits ¨¦tablis ¨¦quivalaient ¨¤ une faute de la part de M. Reiterer, ¨¤ savoir qu'il a viol¨¦ ST / SGB / 2008/5 concernant le chef et le ST / AI / 2013/4 concernant le chef deux. L'UNAT a en outre constat¨¦ que, compte tenu de la nature et des faits sp¨¦cifiques entourant l'inconduite de M. Reiterer, la sanction de la r¨¦trogradation par une cat¨¦gorie avec un report, pendant un an, d'admissibilit¨¦ ¨¤ l'examen de la...

L'UNAT a soutenu qu'il y avait une pr¨¦pond¨¦rance de preuves que le membre du personnel ¨¦tait un passager dans un v¨¦hicule des Nations Unies clairement marqu¨¦ dans lequel des actes de nature sexuelle ont eu lieu lorsqu'il circulait dans une zone fortement trait¨¦e de la ville. Sa conduite constituait une circonstance exceptionnelle en termes de l'article 11.4 (b) de ST / AI / 2017/1, en particulier compte tenu de la nature grave et grave de la conduite dans laquelle il a ¨¦t¨¦ impliqu¨¦, captur¨¦ sur le clip vid¨¦o qui a ¨¦t¨¦ largement diffus¨¦, provoquant Un pr¨¦judice important ¨¤ la r¨¦putation et ¨¤ la...

L'UNAT a constat¨¦ que l'UNT ne s'est pas tromp¨¦ en droit ou en fait ou d¨¦pass¨¦ sa juridiction et a rejet¨¦ l'appel du secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral. L'UNAT a constat¨¦ que l'administration avait ¨¦t¨¦ inform¨¦e des conditions de travail disharmonies au sein du bureau r¨¦gional pour l'Europe et n'avait pas pris de mesures en temps opportun. En exposant M. Cahn ¨¤ des conditions de travail nuisibles pendant une p¨¦riode consid¨¦rable (plusieurs mois), l'administration a ¨¦chou¨¦ dans son devoir de diligence vis-¨¤-vis de M. Cahn pour mettre en ?uvre des mesures pr¨¦ventives ou int¨¦rimaires et donc emp¨ºcher tout dommage...

The UNAT dismissed the appeal. The UNAT held that the UNDT did not err in finding that Mr. Reiterer had committed the alleged misconduct. The UNAT agreed with the finding of the UNDT that the established facts amounted to misconduct on the part of Mr. Reiterer, namely that he violated ST/SGB/2008/5 concerning count one and ST/AI/2013/4 concerning count two. The UNAT further found that given the nature and the specific facts surrounding Mr. Reiterer¡¯s misconduct, the sanction of demotion by one grade with deferment, for one year, of eligibility for consideration for promotion, was not...

The UNAT held that there was a preponderance of evidence that the staff member was a passenger in a clearly-marked UN vehicle in which acts of a sexual nature took place as it circulated in a heavily-trafficked area of the city. His conduct constituted an exceptional circumstance in terms of Section 11.4(b) of ST/AI/2017/1, especially considering the serious and grave nature of the conduct in which he was involved, captured on the video clip which was circulated widely, causing significant harm to the reputation and credibility of the Organization. His placement on ALWOP was a reasonable...

The UNAT found that the UNDT did not err in law or fact or exceed its jurisdiction and it dismissed the Secretary-General's appeal. The UNAT found that the Administration had been made aware of the disharmonious working conditions within the Regional Office for Europe and had failed to take timely action. By exposing Mr. Cahn to harmful working conditions for a considerable amount of time (several months), the Administration failed in its duty of care vis-¨¤-vis Mr. Cahn to timely implement preventive or interim measures and thus prevent any possible harm to his health, irrespective of whether...

The UNAT held that the factual and legal issues arising from this appeal have already been clearly defined by the parties and there is no need for further clarification through an oral hearing.

The UNAT found that the UNDT did not commit any errors when it found that the staff member¡¯s application was irreceivable ratione materiae.

The UNAT noted that the UNDT had correctly held that the staff member had knowledge of the alleged constructive dismissal on either the date that he reiterated his resignation, or at the latest when UNICEF accepted his resignation. His request for management...

UNAT held that the Administration¡¯s decision to suspend the consideration of initiating a disciplinary process and instead resume it should the Appellant become reemployed by the Organization in the future, did not constitute an appealable administrative decision for the purpose of Article 2(1)(a) of the UNDT Statute, as it did not produce a present and direct adverse impact on Ms. Mugo¡¯s terms or conditions of appointment.

UNAT held that all the Administration did was inquire if the Appellant was prepared to cooperate in a disciplinary process. Therefore, as no written allegations were ever...

? titre pr¨¦liminaire, Unat a rejet¨¦ les appels de deux membres du personnel qui n'¨¦taient pas partie ¨¤ la proc¨¦dure devant l'UNDT et n'avaient pas de position. Sur le fond, Unat a jug¨¦ qu'il y avait une d¨¦cision administrative r¨¦visable au sens de l'article 2, paragraphe 1, a) de la loi UNDT. Unat a jug¨¦ que l'UNDT avait commis une erreur en concluant que l'annonce par l'USG / DGACM dat¨¦e du 8 avril 2021 que la charge de travail quotidienne des traducteurs serait pass¨¦e ¨¤ 5,8 pages et de l'auto-retour ¨¤ 6,4 pages, n'¨¦tait pas une d¨¦cision administrative appelable aux fins des fins de Article 2...

As a preliminary matter, UNAT dismissed the appeals of two staff members who were not a party to the proceedings before the UNDT and had no standing. On the merits, UNAT held that there was a reviewable administrative decision within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a) of the UNDT Statute. UNAT held that the UNDT erred finding that the announcement by the USG/DGACM dated 8 April 2021 that the daily workload of translators would be increased to 5.8 pages and of self-revisers to 6.4 pages, was not an appealable administrative decision for the purpose of Article 2(1) of the UNDT Statute. UNAT held...

M. Lucchini et le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral ¨¦taient en d¨¦saccord sur le fait que Unat a confirm¨¦ l'attribution de l'indemnisation de l'UNDT pour dommages moraux, en plus d'augmenter le montant de la r¨¦mun¨¦ration en place de 10 mois ¨¤ 24 mois, ou d'ordonner le paiement de l'augmentation du montant de l'indemnisation en Location (de deux ans de salaire de base nette) mais n'a pas inclus l'attribution initiale de compensation pour pr¨¦judice moral qui avait ¨¦t¨¦ command¨¦e par l'UNDT. M. Lucchini a d¨¦pos¨¦ une demande d'interpr¨¦tation pour confirmer la confirmation de son avis selon laquelle la d¨¦cision d...

Mr. Lucchini and the Secretary-General disagreed on whether UNAT confirmed the UNDT¡¯s award of compensation for moral damages, in addition to increasing the amount of in lieu compensation from 10 months to 24 months, or ordered payment of the increased amount of compensation in lieu (of two years¡¯ net base salary) but did not include the original award of compensation for moral harm that had been ordered by the UNDT. Mr. Lucchini filed an application for interpretation seeking confirmation of his view that UNAT¡¯s ruling increased the amount of in lieu compensation from 10 to 24 months¡¯ net...

Le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral a demand¨¦ l'interpr¨¦tation, la r¨¦vision et l'ex¨¦cution du jugement n ¡ã 2021-UNAT-1118, au motif qu'il n'a pas ¨¦t¨¦ en mesure d'effectuer la r¨¦mun¨¦ration accord¨¦ dans le jugement de l'UND parce que M. Diend a refus¨¦ de fournir ses coordonn¨¦es bancaires. Unat a jug¨¦ que le jugement ¨¦tait clair, ¨¦crit dans un langage clair et sans ambigu?t¨¦, et il n'a laiss¨¦ aucun doute raisonnable quant ¨¤ ce qu'il signifiait. Ainsi, il n'y avait pas besoin de clarification. UNAT a en outre constat¨¦ que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral n'avait pas fait valoir qu'il avait d¨¦couvert un fait d¨¦cisif qui...

The Secretary-General sought interpretation, revision, and execution of Judgment No. 2021-UNAT-1118, on grounds that he was unable to effectuate the compensation awarded in the UNDT Judgment because Mr. Dieng refused to provide his banking details. UNAT held that the Judgment was clear, written in plain and unambiguous language, and it left no reasonable doubt as to what it meant. Thus, there was no need for clarification. UNAT further found that the Secretary-General had failed to argue that he had discovered a decisive fact which was unknown to the Appeals Tribunal at the time the Judgment...

Unat a consid¨¦r¨¦ un appel de Mme Matahen. Unat a jug¨¦ que son appel ¨¦tait d¨¦fectueux en ce qu'il n'avait identifi¨¦ aucun des cinq motifs ¨¦nonc¨¦s ¨¤ l'article 2, paragraphe 1, du statut du tribunal d'appel comme formant la base juridique de son appel. En ce qui concerne la demande ¨¦crite de Mme Matahen pour une prolongation du d¨¦lai pour d¨¦poser une demande, Unat a jug¨¦ que l'UNRWA DT ne s'est pas tromp¨¦ en concluant que son all¨¦gation avait d¨¦couvert que le 17 ao?t 2020, une autre demande similaire de retraite volontaire pr¨¦coce avait ¨¦t¨¦ accord¨¦e par l'UNRWA, ne constituait pas une...

UNAT considered an appeal by Ms. Matahen. UNAT held that her appeal was defective in that it failed to identify any of the five grounds set out in Article 2(1) of the Statute of the Appeals Tribunal as forming the legal basis of her appeal. With regard to Ms. Matahen¡¯s written request for an extension of time to file an application, UNAT held that the UNRWA DT did not err in finding that her allegation that she had only found out on 17 August 2020 that another similar request for Early Voluntary Retirement had been granted by UNRWA, did not constitute an exceptional circumstance, namely, a...