UNDT/2025/018, Peter Stockholder
In the present case, according to the Applicant¡¯s own submissions, he was not in a situation of ¡°an absolute impossibility¡± of filing a timely waiver as per Karki. Instead, while apparently being aware of expiry of the deadline, he continued to work intensely on preparing the application, and rather than giving priority to filing it in time, he instead wanted it ¡°to be perfect¡±. When then filing the application, the Applicant, however, made no reference to it being filed too late or indicating that he requested a waiver of the 90-day deadline under art. 8.3 of the Statute. He only requested a...
UNDT/2025/016, Fernando Salon
The Tribunal rejected the application as not receivable ratione materiae as (1) the record indicates that the Applicant did not submit a request for request for management evaluation to the Management Advice and Evaluation Section as required under staff rule 11.2; and (2) the contested decision had no direct effect on the Applicant, no external legal effect, nor any adverse impact on the Applicant¡¯s contractual employment rights.
UNDT/2025/013, Martin Akerman
The Court found that the Applicant failed to demonstrate the existence of exceptional circumstances or factors beyond his control that prevented him from filing a timely application for enforcement of the Settlement Agreement (see, e.g., Gelsei 2020-UNAT-1035, paras. 19-24).
In any event, the Trtibunal considered that a period of six and a half years to request enforcement was excessive.
025 (NY/2025), JOSEPH-SOLOZANO
Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que la demande ¨¦tait pr¨¦matur¨¦e, car elle concernait un processus de recrutement qui ¨¦tait toujours en cours et pour lequel il n'y avait pas eu de d¨¦cision de s¨¦lection. La d¨¦cision de ne pas convoquer le requ¨¦rant ¨¤ un entretien ¨¦tait une ¨¦tape interm¨¦diaire qui ne constituait pas une d¨¦cision administrative finale susceptible de recours. Par cons¨¦quent, la demande n'¨¦tait pas recevable ratione materiae.
025 (NY/2025), JOSEPH-SOLOZANO
The Tribunal found that the application was premature, as it concerned a recruitment process that was still ongoing and for which there had been no selection decision. The decision not to invite the Applicant for an interview was an intermediate step that was not a final reviewable administrative decision. Consequently, the application was not receivable ratione materiae.
029 (NY/2025), SAMARASINHA
Le Tribunal a pris note de la pr¨¦f¨¦rence du requ¨¦rant pour que l'affaire soit jug¨¦e ¨¤ New York, ¨¦tant donn¨¦ qu'il ¨¦tait ? partiellement r¨¦sident ? aux Etats-Unis avec sa famille. Cependant, apr¨¨s avoir examin¨¦ tous les arguments avanc¨¦s par les parties depuis le d¨¦p?t de l'affaire au greffe de New York, en particulier les documents officiels fournis par le conseil du d¨¦fendeur, le Tribunal a consid¨¦r¨¦ qu'il ¨¦tait appropri¨¦ et dans l'int¨¦r¨ºt de la justice de transf¨¦rer l'affaire au greffe de Gen¨¨ve. Le Tribunal s'est ¨¦galement assur¨¦ que le requ¨¦rant ne serait pas l¨¦s¨¦ par le transfert de l...
029 (NY/2025), SAMARASINHA
The Tribunal took note of the Applicant¡¯s preference to have this case adjudicated in New York since he was ¡°partially resident¡± in the United States with his family. However, having reviewed all of the arguments advanced by the parties since the filing of the case with the New York Registry, particularly the official documents provided by Counsel for the Respondent, the Tribunal considered that it was appropriate and in the interest of justice to transfer the case to the Geneva Registry. The Tribunal was also satisfied that the Applicant would not be prejudiced by the transfer of the case to...
UNDT/2025/011, Roeske
Ayant ¨¦tabli que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e avait ¨¦t¨¦ d?ment notifi¨¦e au requ¨¦rant le 22 mai 2023, le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que la demande d'¨¦valuation de la gestion aurait d? ¨ºtre d¨¦pos¨¦e au plus tard le 22 juillet 2023. Le requ¨¦rant n'ayant d¨¦pos¨¦ la demande d'¨¦valuation de la gestion que le 23 novembre 2023, le Tribunal a ¨¦galement estim¨¦ que la demande n'¨¦tait pas recevable.
L'avocat du requ¨¦rant ayant admis que l'administration avait d¨¦j¨¤ r¨¦gl¨¦ en grande partie les cr¨¦ances fiscales du requ¨¦rant pour 2022 et 2023, le Tribunal a ¨¦galement consid¨¦r¨¦ que ces aspects de la demande ¨¦taient sans objet.
Le...
UNDT/2025/011, Roeske
Having established that the Applicant was duly notified of the contested decision on 22 May 2023, the Tribunal found that the request for management evaluation should have been filed by 22 July 2023, at the latest. Since the Applicant only filed the request for management evaluation on 23 November 2023, the Tribunal further found that the application was not receivable.
As Counsel for the Applicant admitted that the Administration had already substantially settled the Applicant¡¯s tax liability claims for 2022 and 2023, the Tribunal also considered those aspects of the application as moot.
The...
UNDT/2024/057, Kiingi
le Tribunal se prononce en faveur de la requ¨¦rante, en concluant qu'elle a agi de bonne foi dans ses efforts pour obtenir le traitement m¨¦dical de son fils et dans la pr¨¦sentation subs¨¦quente des factures m¨¦dicales pour remboursement.
Le Tribunal estime que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e mettant fin ¨¤ l'emploi de la requ¨¦rante ¨¦tait donc ill¨¦gale.
Le fait qu'un enqu¨ºteur ait suivi le t¨¦moignage d'un t¨¦moin du d¨¦fendeur pendant qu'elle t¨¦moignait est contraire aux normes ¨¦thiques et proc¨¦durales attendues d'un t¨¦moin. La d¨¦cision de ne pas tenir compte de cette r¨¨gle proc¨¦durale fondamentale d¨¦montre non...
UNDT/2024/057, Kiingi
the Tribunal rules in favour of the Applicant, concluding that she acted in good faith in her efforts to secure her son¡¯s medical treatment and in the subsequent submission of medical invoices for reimbursement.
The Tribunal finds that the contested decision terminating the Applicant¡¯s employment, was, therefore, unlawful.
A witness investigator's act of following the testimony of a Respondent witness while she was testifying contravened the ethical and procedural standards expected of a witness by decision to disregard this fundamental procedural rule not only demonstrates a potential bias but...
UNDT/2024/055, Bangambila
En l'esp¨¨ce, il y a manifestement absence de mens rea. Le d¨¦fendeur n'a fourni aucune preuve pour ¨¦tayer l'affirmation selon laquelle la requ¨¦rante aurait ill¨¦galement fait de fausses d¨¦clarations ou aurait eu l'intention de frauder ou de tromper lors de la pr¨¦sentation de sa demande. La requ¨¦rante n'a pas sciemment fait de fausses d¨¦clarations ou pr¨¦sent¨¦ des documents falsifi¨¦s. Elle a pr¨¦sent¨¦ un certificat de naissance contenant les noms et la profession des deux parents. Elle n'a pas menti en remplissant son questionnaire sur l'¨¦tat de d¨¦pendance (formulaire P84), puisqu'elle a ¨¦crit qu...
UNDT/2024/055, Bangambila
In the case at hand there is clearly a lack of mens rea. The Respondent failed to provide any evidence to substantiate the contention that the Applicant unlawfully made any misrepresentation or had any intent to defraud or deceive when submitting her request. She did not knowingly misrepresent or submit falsified documents. She submitted a birth certificate containing the names and occupation of both parents. She did not lie while filling her Questionnaire on Dependency Status (Form P84) as she wrote that she was single, and logically and truthfully answered ¡°N/A¡± when asked after ¡°is your...
UNDT/2024/033, Negasa
Le requ¨¦rant a eu la possibilit¨¦ de compl¨¦ter sa demande par le pr¨¦alable obligatoire au d¨¦p?t d'une demande aupr¨¨s de l'UNDT. Il ne l'a pas fait.
UNDT/2024/033, Negasa
The Applicant was given the opportunity to complete his application with the mandatory prerequisite for the filing of an application before the UNDT. He did not.
UNDT/2024/054, Raschdorf
Pour qu'une requ¨ºte soit consid¨¦r¨¦e comme recevable par le Tribunal, il est essentiel que le requ¨¦rant identifie distinctement la d¨¦cision administrative sp¨¦cifique contest¨¦e. Cette exigence est stipul¨¦e ¨¤ l'art. 2.1 du Statut du Tribunal, qui d¨¦finit les param¨¨tres dans lesquels le Tribunal exerce sa comp¨¦tence. La clart¨¦ de l'identification de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e garantit que le Tribunal dispose d'une base concr¨¨te pour examiner les demandes et ¨¦valuer toute violation all¨¦gu¨¦e des conditions d'emploi.
Dans ces circonstances, le Tribunal estime qu'il est paralys¨¦ par le manque de clart¨¦...
UNDT/2024/054, Raschdorf
For an application to be considered receivable by the Tribunal, it is essential that the Applicant distinctly identifies the specific administrative decision being contested. This requirement is stipulated under art. 2.1 of the Tribunal¡¯s Statute, which outlines the parameters within which the Tribunal exercises its jurisdiction. The clarity in pinpointing the contested decision ensures that there is a concrete basis for the Tribunal to examine the claims and assess any alleged violations of employment terms.
Under the circumstances, the Tribunal finds that it is hamstrung by the lack of...
UNDT/2024/051, Shaban
Le requ¨¦rant dans cette affaire a eu la possibilit¨¦ de compl¨¦ter sa demande avec la condition pr¨¦alable obligatoire pour le d¨¦p?t d'une demande aupr¨¨s de l'UNDT. Le candidat semble avoir mal compris ce qui constitue une ? demande d'¨¦valuation de la gestion ?. Il a suppos¨¦ que le fait de poser des questions sur la proc¨¦dure au responsable du recrutement, puis au chef du personnel de la mission, constituait une ? ¨¦valuation de la gestion ? aux fins de la proc¨¦dure devant l'UNDT. Ce n'est pas le cas.
UNDT/2024/051, Shaban
The Applicant in this case was given the opportunity to complete his application with the mandatory prerequisite for the filing of an application before the UNDT. The Applicant appears to have misunderstood what constitutes a ¡°management evaluation request¡±. He assumed that querying the process with the hiring manager, and later, the Mission¡¯s Chief of Staff, constitutes ¡°management evaluation¡± for the purposes of proceedings before the UNDT. It does not.
UNDT/2023/125, Shaban
Le manque de coop¨¦ration n'est pas toujours une circonstance pertinente dans tous les cas pour ¨ºtre consid¨¦r¨¦e comme une circonstance aggravante. Parfois, si le manque de coop¨¦ration n'est pas grave, il peut ne pas ¨ºtre consid¨¦r¨¦ comme une circonstance aggravante. Toutefois, la nature de l'affaire peut influer sur la mani¨¨re dont le manque de coop¨¦ration au cours d'une enqu¨ºte est per?u. Le fait d'¨ºtre malhonn¨ºte et trompeur au cours de l'enqu¨ºte peut ¨ºtre consid¨¦r¨¦ comme grave et constituer une circonstance aggravante. On ne peut donc pas conclure que le manque de coop¨¦ration ne peut jamais...
Pagination
- Page courante 1
- Goto page 2
- Aller ¨¤ la page suivante
- Aller ¨¤ la derni¨¨re page