2025-UNAT-1557, Thomas John Caldin & Michael John Langelaar
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que l'UNDT n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que la mesure transitoire ¨C accordant 10 semaines de cong¨¦ sp¨¦cial avec salaire int¨¦gral (SLWFP) uniquement aux m¨¨res qui ¨¦taient encore en cong¨¦ de maternit¨¦ au 1er janvier 2023 ¨C n'¨¦tait pas ill¨¦galement discriminatoire.
Elle a estim¨¦ que, m¨ºme si l'on pouvait faire valoir que le fait de privil¨¦gier les m¨¨res biologiques par rapport aux p¨¨res dans les dispositions transitoires entre l'ancien et le nouveau r¨¦gime de cong¨¦ parental ¨¦tait discriminatoire, cela ne constituait pas une discrimination ill¨¦gale pour deux raisons : i)...
2025-UNAT-1546, Emma Reilly
L'UNAT a conclu que l'UNDT n'avait pas commis d'erreur en estimant que les deux retards dans le traitement des plaintes de l'ancienne fonctionnaire ne constituaient pas une preuve de partialit¨¦ ¨¤ son ¨¦gard. L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que le retard seul n'¨¦tait pas r¨¦v¨¦lateur d'une partialit¨¦.
L'UNAT a en outre estim¨¦ que les all¨¦gations de l'ancienne fonctionnaire relatives ¨¤ un certain communiqu¨¦ de presse avaient d¨¦j¨¤ fait l'objet de d¨¦cisions rendues par le Tribunal et ne pouvaient faire l'objet d'un nouveau litige.
Le TUNI a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que le TND avait correctement confirm¨¦ que la cr¨¦ation du...
2025-UNAT-1567, Anastasia Rotheroe
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que l'UNDT n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant qu'il avait ¨¦t¨¦ prouv¨¦ par des ¨¦l¨¦ments clairs et convaincants que la fonctionnaire s'¨¦tait livr¨¦e ¨¤ du harc¨¨lement et ¨¤ des abus de pouvoir, avait utilis¨¦ son poste ¨¤ des fins personnelles pour nuire ¨¤ la situation d'un coll¨¨gue, avait divulgu¨¦ des informations sensibles, n'avait pas signal¨¦ les ¨¦ventuels fautes professionnelles d'autres personnes, avait utilis¨¦ une adresse ¨¦lectronique personnelle en violation des dispositions applicables et avait ¨¦chang¨¦ des messages inappropri¨¦s au sujet de coll¨¨gues.
Le TUNAT a estim¨¦ que...
2025-UNAT-1581, Waleed Ammar
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que l'UNDT avait commis une erreur en concluant que l'administration n'avait pas prouv¨¦ de mani¨¨re claire et convaincante que M. Ammar avait publi¨¦ le message sur Facebook, car le bureau de l'inspecteur g¨¦n¨¦ral (IGO) avait ¨¦cart¨¦ de mani¨¨re inappropri¨¦e la possibilit¨¦ que le compte Facebook de M. Ammar ait ¨¦t¨¦ pirat¨¦. L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que l'administration s'¨¦tait acquitt¨¦e de son obligation de prouver qu'il ¨¦tait hautement probable que M. Ammar ait publi¨¦ le commentaire et ait ainsi exprim¨¦ publiquement son soutien ¨¤ un crime d'honneur. L'administration a produit des preuves non...
2025-UNAT-1575, Ivan Aguilar Valle
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que l'article 9(4) du Statut du TUDN concernant la nature du contr?le juridictionnel exerc¨¦ par le TUDN dans les affaires disciplinaires ne s'appliquait pas ¨¤ l'affaire en question, car il avait ¨¦t¨¦ adopt¨¦ apr¨¨s la tenue de l'audience. Les parties ont pr¨¦sent¨¦ leurs preuves, y compris une chronologie des faits convenus ainsi que des t¨¦moignages en direct, et ont pr¨¦sent¨¦ leurs conclusions respectives apr¨¨s l'audience, dans un cadre juridique o¨´ l'article 9(4) n'¨¦tait pas applicable et o¨´ il serait inappropri¨¦, et constituerait un d¨¦ni de proc¨¦dure r¨¦guli¨¨re, d'appliquer un...
2025-UNAT-1569, Nicole Wynn
The UNAT was of the view that the UNDT¡¯s analysis of the applicable legal framework governing the education grant, specifically the costs admissible for reimbursement, had been erroneous and the UNDT had exceeded its jurisdiction when it found the promulgation of the amended administrative instruction unlawful. The UNAT found that the UNDT had failed to provide the reasons, facts and law on which it had based its Judgment.
The UNAT held that the fees which were clearly intended to cover extra-curricular activities or general non-academic services, and were not intended to cover administrative...
2025-UNAT-1567, Anastasia Rotheroe
The UNAT held that the UNDT had not erred in finding that it had been proven by clear and convincing evidence that the staff member had engaged in harassment and abuse of authority, used her office for personal reasons to prejudice the position of a colleague, disclosed sensitive information, failed to report the possible misconduct of others, used a personal e-mail address contrary to the applicable provisions, and exchanged inappropriate messages about colleagues.
The UNAT found that regardless of whether she had been a whistleblower engaged in a protected activity, there was no evidence that...
2025-UNAT-1558, Jacques Cramatte et al.
The UNAT noted that the health insurance premiums imposed by the UPU in 2023 differed according to factors such as age, retirement status and country of residence.
The UNAT held that there was no support for the appellants' contention regarding the principle of solidarity used in the Swiss social security law, as for several years such principle had no longer been applied by the UPU.
The UNAT determined that the rate of the UPU¡¯s contribution did not differ between the various age groups and there was no evidence that the premium increases were inconsistent with the costs the insurance provider...
2025-UNAT-1562, Rasha Aladdin Al Osta
Le TUNAT a not¨¦ que le comit¨¦ d'entretien avait d¨¦sign¨¦ la fonctionnaire comme l'une des candidates recommand¨¦es pour le poste, mais que le rapport de recrutement ne mentionnait pas, par erreur, si elle avait ¨¦t¨¦ consid¨¦r¨¦e sur une base d'¨¦quivalence. Le TUNAT a observ¨¦ que le comit¨¦ consultatif avait par la suite estim¨¦ que son exp¨¦rience ne lui permettait pas de b¨¦n¨¦ficier de l'¨¦quivalence et qu'elle ne remplissait pas les conditions requises en mati¨¨re de formation.
Le TPNU a estim¨¦ que, comme la fonctionnaire avait ¨¦t¨¦ s¨¦lectionn¨¦e ¨¤ tort, sa participation au reste du processus de...
2025-UNAT-1559, Emma Reilly
The UNAT held that the Secretary-General had not implicitly withdrawn delegated authority to the Under-Secretary-General for Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance (USG/DMSPC) when the Chef de Cabinet sought advice from the USG/DMSPC.
The UNAT held that the UNDT did not err in concluding that the USG/DMSPC reasonably rejected the report of the March 2020 Alternate Chair. The UNAT affirmed that the Administration was empowered impliedly to decline to act on a report that it considered as having exceeded its authorized parameters. Moreover, the UNAT concluded that the USG/DMSPC had the...
2025-UNAT-1546, Emma Reilly
The UNAT concluded that the UNDT did not err in finding that two periods of delay in addressing the former staff member¡¯s complaints was not evidence of bias against her. The UNAT held that delay alone is not indicative of bias.
The UNAT further held that the former staff member¡¯s claims related to a certain press release had been decided by prior Tribunal judgments and could not be relitigated.
The UNAT also found that the UNDT correctly confirmed that the establishment of the fact-finding Panel, its process of fact-finding and reporting, and its interactions with the former staff member as...
2025-UNAT-1581, Waleed Ammar
The UNAT held that the UNDT erred in finding that the Administration had not proven by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Ammar made the Facebook post because the Inspector General¡¯s Office (IGO) inappropriately discounted the possibility that Mr. Ammar¡¯s Facebook account had been hacked. The UNAT found that the Administration met its burden of establishing that it was highly probable that Mr. Ammar posted the Comment and thus publicly expressed support for an honour killing. The Administration produced uncontradicted evidence that the comment came from Mr. Ammar¡¯s Facebook account and he...
2025-UNAT-1575, Ivan Aguilar Valle
The UNAT found that Article 9(4) of the UNDT Statute regarding the nature of the judicial review that the UNDT conducts in disciplinary cases did not apply to the instant case as it was adopted after the hearing was held. The parties presented their evidence, including a chronology of agreed facts as well as live testimony, and made their respective post-hearing submissions, under a legal framework where Article 9(4) was not operative and it would be inappropriate, and a denial of due process, to apply a new evidentiary framework at the point of decision, ex post facto.
The UNAT found that...
2025-UNAT-1552, Catalin Gicu Tomeci
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que l'UNDT avait correctement conclu que l'ancien fonctionnaire avait commis une faute en violant ¨¤ plusieurs reprises, pendant plus d'un an et demi, les r¨¨gles interdisant ¨¤ son ¨¦pouse de passer la nuit avec lui dans l'enceinte de la MINUSS, un lieu d'affectation non familial, sans autorisation ni paiement des frais d'h¨¦bergement requis, malgr¨¦ de multiples avertissements et une r¨¦primande pr¨¦alable.
Le TUNAT a ¨¦galement confirm¨¦ que, lors d'une s¨¦ance de conseil, l'ancien fonctionnaire avait menac¨¦ de tuer son ¨¦pouse et tout membre du personnel afin de prot¨¦ger leur mariage et...
2025-UNAT-1548, Ghazal Ozairi
L'UNAT a rejet¨¦ la demande d'anonymat de l'ancienne fonctionnaire, car elle avait ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pos¨¦e hors d¨¦lai et sans circonstances exceptionnelles justifiant une d¨¦rogation au d¨¦lai.
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que le DT de l'UNRWA n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que la demande de l'ancienne fonctionnaire n'¨¦tait pas recevable. Le d¨¦lai de 60 jours dans lequel elle devait pr¨¦senter une demande de r¨¦vision de d¨¦cision (RDR) a commenc¨¦ le 13 septembre 2023 et a pris fin le 11 novembre 2023. Comme sa RDR a ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pos¨¦e (c'est-¨¤-dire re?ue par l'Agence) tard dans la journ¨¦e du 11 novembre 2023, elle a...
2025-UNAT-1547, Inas Margieh
L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que la cr¨¦ation du poste de repr¨¦sentant sp¨¦cial adjoint (DSR), dans le cadre de la mise en ?uvre des recommandations visant ¨¤ restructurer le Bureau des territoires palestiniens occup¨¦s, constituait une d¨¦cision administrative de nature g¨¦n¨¦rale. Il a en outre conclu que, bien que le nouveau mandat du poste de RDS transf¨¨re ¨¤ son titulaire certaines fonctions et responsabilit¨¦s qui faisaient auparavant partie du mandat du fonctionnaire, cette r¨¦attribution ne suffisait pas ¨¤ elle seule pour conclure que la cr¨¦ation du poste de RDS avait des cons¨¦quences juridiques directes...
2025-UNAT-1560, Emma Reilly
The UNAT held that the former staff member¡¯s challenge was to a recommendation of the Alternate Chair of the Ethics Panel, and as an ethics recommendation, it was not an administrative decision subject to judicial review. Thus, the UNDT correctly dismissed this part of the application as not receivable.
The UNAT further found that the Administration¡¯s rejection of the March 2020 Alternate Chair¡¯s report and recommendation could not have been understood by the Ethics Office to be a request to conduct a new review. The UNAT observed that the evidence before the UNDT was that the decision was...
2025-UNAT-1557, Thomas John Caldin & Michael John Langelaar
The UNAT held that the UNDT did not err in concluding that the transitional measure ¨C granting 10 weeks of special leave with full pay (SLWFP) only to mothers who were still on maternity leave on 1 January 2023 ¨C was not unlawfully discriminatory.
It found that, while it might be argued that preferring birth mothers over fathers in the transitional arrangements between the old and new parental leave regimes was discriminatory, it was not unlawfully discriminatory for two reasons: i) the desirability of breastfeeding in circumstances that are inconsistent with their mothers also working full...
2025-UNAT-1548, Ghazal Ozairi
The UNAT rejected the former staff member¡¯s motion for anonymity, as it was filed out of time and without exceptional circumstances justifying a waiver of the time limit.
The UNAT found that the UNRWA DT did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s application was not receivable. The 60-day period within which she had to submit a request for decision review (RDR) began on 13 September 2023 and ended on 11 November 2023. As her RDR was lodged (i.e., received by the Agency) late on 11 November 2023, it was lodged within the statutory time limit. However, in the absence of a...
2025-UNAT-1562, Rasha Aladdin Al Osta
The UNAT noted that the interview panel had nominated the staff member as one of the recommended candidates for appointment to the post but the Recruitment Report had been erroneously silent as to whether she had been considered on an equivalency basis. The UNAT observed that the advisory committee had subsequently found that her experience did not qualify her for equivalency and that she had not met the educational qualifications.
The UNAT held that because the staff member had been wrongly shortlisted, her participation in the remainder of the recruitment process had been unlawful and any...