Â鶹APP

? 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.

The Appeals Tribunal found that the UNDT correctly dismissed Mr. Salon¡¯s application as not receivable on grounds that he had failed to establish that an appealable administrative decision had been taken by the Organization and that in any event, he had failed to request management evaluation.

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 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...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que, puisque M. Nigam avait fond¨¦ son recours interlocutoire sur de pr¨¦tendues erreurs de fait et de droit commises par le juge-pr¨¦sident du TANU, sans all¨¦guer que le TANU avait agi de mani¨¨re extrajudiciaire ou en outrepassant sa comp¨¦tence, il devait attendre, pour exercer son droit de recours, qu'une d¨¦cision finale ait ¨¦t¨¦ rendue.
Le TANU a conclu qu'un arr¨ºt ant¨¦rieur du TANU ne contenait aucune indication de partialit¨¦ du juge Belle ¨¤ l'encontre de M. Nigam, ni aucune critique allant au-del¨¤ de ce qu'un observateur raisonnablement inform¨¦ pourrait attendre d'un arr¨ºt...

The UNAT held that, since Mr. Nigam based his interlocutory appeal on alleged errors of fact and law by the UNDT Judge President, with no allegation of the UNDT acting extra-jurisdictionally or similarly in excess of its jurisdiction, he must wait to exercise his right of appeal until a final decision has been made.

The UNAT concluded that an earlier UNDT Judgment contained neither any indication of bias by Judge Belle against Mr. Nigam, nor any criticism beyond what a reasonably informed observer might expect from a partly erroneous judgment and its subsequent appellate review.

The UNAT...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que la d¨¦cision administrative concernant les remboursements ¨¤ l'agent a pris effet en droit le 7 mai 2019, date ¨¤ laquelle il a re?u le virement de l'Organisation. Les raisons de ce montant de remboursement ont ¨¦t¨¦ discut¨¦es avec lui peu de temps avant que le virement ne soit effectu¨¦. Bien que les explications des calculs sous-jacents aient ¨¦t¨¦ r¨¦p¨¦t¨¦es dans des ¨¦changes de courriels ult¨¦rieurs avec le membre du personnel, ces r¨¦p¨¦titions ne constituaient pas des d¨¦cisions administratives suppl¨¦mentaires ou nouvelles susceptibles d'¨ºtre contest¨¦es par le membre du...

The UNAT held that the administrative decision concerning reimbursements to the staff member took effect in law on 7 May 2019, when he received the wire transfer from the Organization. The reasons for this reimbursement amount were discussed with him shortly before the wire transfer was made. Although explanations of the underlying calculations were repeated in subsequent email exchanges with the staff member, those repetitions were not additional or new administrative decisions that were open to challenge by the staff member, thereby resetting the statute of limitations.

The UNAT found...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que M. Safi ne s'¨¦tait pas acquitt¨¦ de la charge qui lui incombait d'identifier en quoi et pour quelles raisons le DT de l'UNRWA avait commis une erreur dans son jugement. M. Safi s'est content¨¦ de r¨¦it¨¦rer les m¨ºmes arguments que ceux qu'il avait pr¨¦sent¨¦s dans sa requ¨ºte au tribunal de l'UNRWA. Le TANU a d¨¦clar¨¦ qu'il ne lui appartenait pas de r¨¦examiner le cas de l'agent et que, par cons¨¦quent, son recours devait ¨ºtre rejet¨¦. Le TANU a ¨¦galement observ¨¦ que le DT de l'UNRWA avait tir¨¦ des conclusions raisonnables de son vaste exercice d'¨¦tablissement des faits et qu'il...

The UNAT held that Mr. Safi failed to discharge his burden in identifying in what respect and for what reasons the UNRWA DT erred in its Judgment. Mr. Safi merely reiterated the same arguments that he had presented in his application to the UNRWA DT. The UNAT stated that it is not its role to reexamine the staff member¡¯s case anew, and accordingly, his appeal must fail. The UNAT also observed that the UNRWA DT drew reasonable inferences from its extensive fact-finding exercise and delivered a well-reasoned judgment.

The appeal was dismissed, and Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2023/011 was...

Le TANU a pr¨¦cis¨¦ que la seule question ¨¦tait de savoir si le requ¨¦rant, un ancien membre du personnel, avait pr¨¦sent¨¦ un fait nouveau et d¨¦cisif qui lui ¨¦tait inconnu, ainsi qu'au Tribunal d'appel, lorsque l'arr¨ºt ant¨¦rieur du TANU a ¨¦t¨¦ rendu, et que ce fait aurait eu une incidence mat¨¦rielle sur l'issue de cet arr¨ºt.
Le TANU a examin¨¦ les documents soumis par l'ancien fonctionnaire et a conclu qu'ils ¨¦taient tous connus de lui avant le prononc¨¦ de l'arr¨ºt du TANU. L'ancien fonctionnaire a essentiellement r¨¦p¨¦t¨¦ ou ajout¨¦ les m¨ºmes arguments que ceux qu'il avait avanc¨¦s dans son premier...

The UNAT specified that the sole issue was whether the applicant, a former staff member, had presented a new and decisive fact that was unknown to him and the Appeals Tribunal when the prior UNAT Judgment was decided, and that this fact would have materially impacted the outcome of that Judgment.

The UNAT reviewed the documents submitted by the former staff member and concluded that they were all known to him prior to the issuance of the UNAT Judgment. The former staff member essentially repeated or added to the same arguments he made in his original appeal, and the UNAT had already...

Le TANU a d'abord observ¨¦ que l'agent avait consacr¨¦ une partie de son m¨¦moire d'appel ¨¤ contester les conclusions de fait d'un jugement ant¨¦rieur de l'UNDT concernant son dossier disciplinaire. Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'il ¨¦tait emp¨ºch¨¦ de le faire parce qu'il n'avait pas fait appel de ce premier jugement de l'UNDT.
Le TANU a estim¨¦ que lorsque le TNDU a examin¨¦ la sanction disciplinaire impos¨¦e, il a correctement pris en compte les cas ant¨¦rieurs impliquant une faute comparable, ainsi que les facteurs aggravants et att¨¦nuants. Les circonstances att¨¦nuantes invoqu¨¦es par l'agent ont ¨¦t¨¦ prises en...

The UNAT first observed that the staff member dedicated parts of his appeal brief to challenging the findings of fact in an earlier UNDT judgment concerning his disciplinary case. The UNAT held that he was estopped from doing so because he did not appeal this earlier UNDT judgment.

The UNAT was satisfied that when the UNDT reviewed the disciplinary sanction imposed, the UNDT properly considered previous cases involving comparable misconduct, as well as aggravating and mitigating factors. The mitigating factors raised by the staff member were considered by the Administration, but they simply...