Â鶹APP

? titre pr¨¦liminaire, le Tribunal d'appel a rejet¨¦ l'argument de M. Wan selon lequel le fait qu'il n'ait pas ¨¦t¨¦ repr¨¦sent¨¦ devant la commission de recours de l'OACI l'a consid¨¦rablement d¨¦savantag¨¦, ce qui a eu une incidence directe sur l'issue de l'affaire.

S'agissant du fond de l'affaire, le Tribunal d'appel a confirm¨¦ les conclusions de la Commission de recours selon lesquelles il avait ¨¦t¨¦ prouv¨¦ de mani¨¨re claire et convaincante que M. Wan avait commis deux fautes qui justifiaient l'imposition de la sanction de licenciement.Sur la base des documents pr¨¦sent¨¦s par le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral...

As a preliminary matter, the Appeals Tribunal dismissed Mr. Wan's argument that he had been placed at a considerable disadvantage, directly impacting the outcome of the case, by the fact that he had been unrepresented before the ICAO Appeals Board.

Turning to the merits of the case, the Appeals Tribunal affirmed the findings of the Appeals Board that on clear and convincing evidence two counts of misconduct had been proved to have been committed by Mr. Wan which justified the imposition of the sanction of dismissal. On the material presented by the Secretary-General to the President, the...

En ce qui concerne l'application pr¨¦tendument discriminatoire et arbitraire de la r¨¨gle 105.3 du personnel de l'OACI concernant les heures suppl¨¦mentaires, le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que la Commission de recours n'avait pas commis d'erreur en constatant que M. Alvear n'avait pas identifi¨¦ de d¨¦cision administrative sp¨¦cifique susceptible de recours, et qu'elle n'avait donc pas commis d'erreur en rejetant sa demande.

En ce qui concerne la plainte de M. Alvear selon laquelle il n'avait pas re?u les r¨¦sultats de la classification de son poste, le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que la Commission de...

With respect to the alleged discriminatory and arbitrary application of ICAO Staff Rule 105.3 regarding overtime, the Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Appeals Board had made no error in finding that Mr. Alvear had failed to identify any specific appealable administrative decision, and that it therefore did not err in dismissing his application.

Turning to Mr. Alvear¡¯s complaint that he did not receive the desk audit classification results for his position, the Appeals Tribunal found that the ICAO Appeals Board did err in finding the application not receivable since the Administration¡¯s...

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...

D'embl¨¦e, le Tribunal d'appel a not¨¦ que Mme Monasebian n'avait fourni que peu ou pas de raisons ¨¤ l'appui de sa demande d'anonymisation de l'arr¨ºt, si ce n'est une d¨¦claration g¨¦n¨¦rale selon laquelle les informations relatives ¨¤ son affaire ¨¦taient sensibles. Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que l'anonymisation n'¨¦tait pas justifi¨¦e en l'esp¨¨ce et a rejet¨¦ sa demande.

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant qu'il existait une pr¨¦pond¨¦rance de la preuve que Mme Monasebian avait adopt¨¦ un comportement qui avait cr¨¦¨¦ un environnement de travail intimidant...

At the outset, the Appeals Tribunal noted that Ms. Monasebian had provided little or no reason in support of her request for the anonymization of the Judgment other than a general statement that the information in her case was sensitive. The Appeals Tribunal took the view that anonymization was not warranted in this case and dismissed her request.

The Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the UNDT did not err in finding that there was a preponderance of the evidence that Ms. Monasebian had engaged in a pattern of conduct through which she created an intimidating, hostile and/or offensive work...

? 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 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 jug¨¦ irrecevable le fait que M. Lago se soit appuy¨¦ sur des ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve suppl¨¦mentaires sans d¨¦poser de requ¨ºte.
Le TANU a confirm¨¦ qu'il n'y avait aucune preuve qu'une demande sp¨¦cifique d'¨¦valuation de la sant¨¦ au travail, faite par M. Lago, ¨¤ titre individuel, ¨¤ un fonctionnaire comp¨¦tent, ait ¨¦t¨¦ refus¨¦e ou ignor¨¦e. En outre, les demandes de M. Lago refl¨¦taient ses tentatives persistantes de contester un tort per?u, qui ne peut ¨ºtre per?u en soi comme une d¨¦cision administrative implicite.
Le TANU a conclu qu'en l'absence de toute preuve d'une demande claire susceptible...

The UNAT held that, Mr. Lago¡¯s reliance on additional evidence without filing a motion, was inadmissible.

The UNAT confirmed that, there was no evidence that a specific request for an occupational health evaluation, made by Mr. Lago, in an individual capacity to an appropriate official, was refused or ignored. Additionally, Mr. Lago¡¯s requests mirrored his persistent attempts to challenge a perceived wrong, which on its own cannot be perceived as an implied administrative decision.

The UNAT concluded that, in the absence of any evidence of a clear request capable of giving rise to an...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le TUNDT avait rejet¨¦ ¨¤ juste titre la demande de Mme Yu au motif qu'elle n'¨¦tait pas recevable ratione temporis. Le TANU a soulign¨¦ qu'¨¦tant donn¨¦ que le poste de Mme Yu ¨¦tait bas¨¦ en Europe occidentale, les d¨¦lais statutaires doivent ¨ºtre calcul¨¦s en fonction de l'heure de Gen¨¨ve, o¨´ le TANU est situ¨¦, et que Mme Yu avait donc d¨¦pass¨¦ le d¨¦lai d'un jour.

Le TANU a rejet¨¦ les nouveaux arguments et ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve relatifs au processus de m¨¦diation qui lui ¨¦taient soumis pour la premi¨¨re fois. M¨ºme s'ils ¨¦taient pris en compte, le TANU a conclu que la m¨¦diation ne...

The UNAT found that the UNDT had appropriately dismissed Ms. Yu¡¯s application as not receivable ratione temporis. The UNAT emphasized that because Ms. Yu¡¯s position was based in Western Europe, the statutory time limits must be calculated based on Geneva time where the UNDT is located, and therefore, Ms. Yu missed the deadline by one day.

The UNAT rejected the new arguments and evidence related to the mediation process submitted to the UNAT for the first time. Even if these were considered, the UNAT concluded that the mediation did not pertain to the contested decision and therefore did not...

Le TANU a rejet¨¦ les nouveaux arguments et ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve soumis pour la premi¨¨re fois au Tribunal d'appel, qui visaient ¨¤ d¨¦montrer que M. El-Anani n'avait pas lu la pi¨¨ce jointe du courriel communiquant la sanction disciplinaire.
Le TANU a confirm¨¦ que les deux enregistrements de notification Microsoft Outlook reconnus par M. El-Anani indiquaient que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e lui avait ¨¦t¨¦ remise et qu'il l'avait lue le 28 mars 2023 et qu'il ¨¦tait donc tenu de d¨¦poser sa demande aupr¨¨s du TANU au plus tard le 26 juin 2023. ?tant donn¨¦ que M. Al-Anani n'a d¨¦pos¨¦ sa demande que le 28 juin 2023...

The UNAT rejected the new arguments and evidence submitted to the Appeals Tribunal for the first time that were aimed to show that Mr. El-Anani had not read the attachment of the e-mail that communicated the disciplinary sanction.

The UNAT confirmed that, the two Microsoft Outlook notification records acknowledged by Mr. El-Anani indicated that the contested decision had been delivered to and read by him on 28 March 2023 and that he was therefore required to file his application with the UNDT by no later than 26 June 2023. Since Mr. Al-Anani did not file the application until 28 June 2023...