51ÁÔÆæ

L¡¯UNAT a constat¨¦ que Mme George avait d¨¦pos¨¦ sa demande de retour au syst¨¨me de r¨¦mun¨¦ration en dollars am¨¦ricains le 4 ao?t 2015 et que l¡¯Administration l¡¯avait rejet¨¦e le 10 novembre 2015. Malgr¨¦ cette communication claire, l¡¯ancienne fonctionnaire a continu¨¦ ¨¤ ¨¦changer des courriers avec l¡¯Administration afin d¡¯obtenir un r¨¦examen de la d¨¦cision pendant pr¨¨s de neuf ans. Elle a attendu le 9 avril 2024 pour d¨¦poser sa demande de r¨¦examen aupr¨¨s du Comit¨¦ permanent. Comme celle-ci avait ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pos¨¦e au-del¨¤ du d¨¦lai l¨¦gal de quatre-vingt-dix jours ¨¤ compter de la r¨¦ception de la notification...

The UNAT found that Ms. George submitted her request to revert to the US dollar track system on 4 August 2015 and the Administration rejected it on 10 November 2015.Despite that clear communication, the former staff member continued to exchange correspondence with the Administration seeking reconsideration of the decision for almost nine years.She waited until 9 April 2024 before submitting her request for review to the Standing Committee.As it was filed beyond the statutory time limit of ninety days of receipt of notification of the contested decision, the UNAT held that her request was...

The UNAT held that the issues on appeal were whether the UNDT erred in finding that the Secretary-General lawfully exercised his discretion in cancelling the Recruit from Roster Job Opening, whether the decision was supported by a rational and reasonable basis, and whether the UNDT erred in rejecting the staff member¡¯s allegations of discrimination, improper motive, or procedural irregularity.

The UNAT found that the UNDT correctly applied established jurisprudence on staff selection, including the principle that the Administration is not obliged to complete a recruitment exercise once...

The UNAT held that the issues on appeal were whether the UNDT erred in finding the application not receivable for failure to request management evaluation within the mandatory 60?day time limit, whether it erred in identifying the date of notification of the contested administrative decision, and whether any findings on mootness or alleged due process violations affected the outcome. It recalled that its role on appeal is limited to determining whether the UNDT committed an error of law, fact, or procedure resulting in an unreasonable decision.

The UNAT held that the UNDT correctly identified...

Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que la demande de M. Issa ne remplissait pas les conditions strictes de recevabilit¨¦ pr¨¦vues par le Statut de l'UNAT, ¨¤ savoir que le fait d¨¦terminant sur lequel il s'appuie aujourd'hui, ¨¤ savoir la fermeture compl¨¨te de tous les bureaux de l'UNRWA en Cisjordanie, ¨¦tait inconnu du Tribunal d'appel et de lui-m¨ºme avant le jugement. Ce fait ¨¦tait clairement connu de M. Issa, ce qui rendait sa demande irrecevable pour ce seul motif.

Le TUNC a not¨¦ que M. Issa ne pr¨¦sente pas, ni ne pr¨¦tend m¨ºme poss¨¦der, de preuve qu'il s'est effectivement conform¨¦ aux directives de l'UNRWA...

The Tribunal found that Mr. Issa¡¯s application does not satisfy the stringent prerequisites for receivability under the UNAT Statute, namely, that the decisive fact he now relies upon, that all UNRWA offices in the West Bank field were closed completely, was unknown to the Appeals Tribunal and to himself, prior to the Judgment. This was plainly known to Mr. Issa, rendering his application non-receivable on this ground alone.

The UNAT noted that Mr. Issa does not present, or even purport to possess, evidence that he in fact had complied with UNRWA¡¯s directives to advise the Agency of his...

L'UNAT a not¨¦ que le fonctionnaire figurait en t¨ºte de la liste des candidats recommand¨¦s, mais a estim¨¦ que le Haut-Commissaire n'¨¦tait pas tenu de le s¨¦lectionner, car tous les candidats figurant sur la liste avaient ¨¦t¨¦ jug¨¦s aptes ¨¤ exercer les fonctions du poste.

L'UNAT a conclu que le fonctionnaire n'avait pas fourni, dans son recours, de raison convaincante expliquant pourquoi et comment une audience devant le TFP aurait pu influencer la d¨¦cision rendue dans cette affaire.

Le TUNAT a estim¨¦ que le fonctionnaire n'avait pas re?u une note de performance erron¨¦e et que le TDPI n'avait pas...

L'UNAT a observ¨¦ que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral avait choisi de limiter la port¨¦e de son appel aux seules conclusions du TDPI concernant deux des neuf cas de faute pr¨¦sum¨¦e commise par l'ancien fonctionnaire. L'UNAT a en outre reconnu que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral soutenait que le TDPI avait commis une erreur de droit en appliquant les crit¨¨res juridiques relatifs au harc¨¨lement et au harc¨¨lement sexuel aux deux incidents.

N¨¦anmoins, le TUNAS a estim¨¦ que pour trancher la question en appel, il ne suffisait pas d'appliquer simplement le crit¨¨re juridique correct. Pour parvenir ¨¤ une conclusion, il ne...

Le Tribunal d'appel a fait droit aux appels du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral, rejet¨¦ l'appel de M. Heurtematte et infirm¨¦ les jugements du TFP.
Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que les motifs largement sp¨¦culatifs invoqu¨¦s par le TFP pour conclure ¨¤ l'existence d'arri¨¨re-pens¨¦es de la part d'ONU Femmes n'¨¦taient pas justifi¨¦s, surtout si on les compare aux raisons imp¨¦rieuses qui ont motiv¨¦ la suppression du poste ¨¤ l'¨¦poque, ¨¤ savoir le fait qu'ONU Femmes n'avait plus de bureau physique au Panama, que le personnel travaillait ¨¤ domicile et que les v¨¦hicules avaient ¨¦t¨¦ vendus. Le TFP est all¨¦ trop loin en...

The UNAT noted that the staff member had been ranked first on the list of recommended candidates but held that the High Commissioner had been under no obligation to select him, since all the candidates included in the list had been deemed suitable to carry out the functions of the post.

The UNAT found that the staff member had given no convincing reason on appeal as to why and how an oral hearing before the UNDT would have impacted the decision of the case.

The UNAT found that the staff member had not received a wrong performance rating and that the UNDT had not misrepresented or failed to give...

The UNAT observed that the Secretary-General elected to limit the scope of his appeal only against the findings of the UNDT with respect to two of nine instances of alleged misconduct by the former staff member. The UNAT further acknowledged that the Secretary-General¡¯s contention was that the UNDT erred in law when it applied the legal tests for harassment and sexual harassment to the two incidents.

Nonetheless, the UNAT held that to determine the issue on appeal required more than simply an application of the correct legal test. To reach any conclusions requires more than simply regard to...

The Appeals Tribunal granted the Secretary-General¡¯s appeals, dismissed Mr. Heurtematte¡¯s appeal and reversed the UNDT Judgments.

The Appeals Tribunal found that the UNDT¡¯s largely speculative grounds for concluding ulterior motives by UN Women were not justified, especially when compared to the compelling contemporaneous reasons for the abolition, i.e. the fact that UN Women no longer had a physical office in Panama, that the staff was working from home, and that the motor vehicles had been sold. The UNDT went too far in reaching its own speculative conclusions why and how UN Women...

L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que les all¨¦gations du fonctionnaire concernant la manipulation frauduleuse de ses registres ¨¦lectroniques de cong¨¦s n'¨¦taient pas fond¨¦es, faute de preuves.

Le TUNAT a en outre estim¨¦ que le TUDN avait commis une erreur en laissant des questions factuelles cruciales en suspens, ce qui rendait impossible de statuer pleinement sur l'appel. Le TUNAT a conclu que les tableaux r¨¦capitulatifs des registres de cong¨¦s de maladie du fonctionnaire n'¨¦taient pas des ou?-dire, mais constituaient des registres commerciaux dont l'exactitude devait ¨ºtre pr¨¦sum¨¦e, sauf preuve contraire...

Le TNP a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal du contentieux de l'UNRWA n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que la demande de l'ancien fonctionnaire concernant le calcul des prestations du Fonds de pr¨¦voyance ¨¦tait sans fondement, car l'Office avait correctement appliqu¨¦ le cadre juridique en vigueur. Le TNP a estim¨¦ qu'en vertu de l'article 106.1(16)(D)(ii) du R¨¨glement du personnel local, le dernier taux d'int¨¦r¨ºt sp¨¦cial publi¨¦ s'applique jusqu'au mois pr¨¦c¨¦dant imm¨¦diatement le paiement inclus. ?tant donn¨¦ que le paiement a ¨¦t¨¦ effectu¨¦ en ao?t 2022, l'Agence a correctement appliqu¨¦ la circulaire...

Le TNP a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal du contentieux de l'UNRWA n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que la demande de l'ancien fonctionnaire concernant le calcul des prestations du Fonds de pr¨¦voyance ¨¦tait sans fondement, car l'Office avait correctement appliqu¨¦ le cadre juridique en vigueur. Le TNP a estim¨¦ qu'en vertu de l'article 106.1(16)(D)(ii) du R¨¨glement du personnel local, le dernier taux d'int¨¦r¨ºt sp¨¦cial publi¨¦ s'applique jusqu'au mois pr¨¦c¨¦dant imm¨¦diatement le paiement inclus. ?tant donn¨¦ que le paiement a ¨¦t¨¦ effectu¨¦ en ao?t 2022, l'Agence a correctement appliqu¨¦ la circulaire...

The UNAT held that the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s claim regarding the calculation of Provident Fund benefits was unfounded because the Agency correctly applied the governing legal framework. The UNAT found that, under Area Staff Rule 106.1(16)(D)(ii), the last published special interest rate applies up to and including the month immediately preceding payment. Since the payment was made in August 2022, the Agency properly applied PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022, which declared a negative special interest rate of -15.18% for January¨CJune...

The UNAT held that the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member¡¯s claim regarding the calculation of Provident Fund benefits was unfounded because the Agency correctly applied the governing legal framework. The UNAT found that, under Area Staff Rule 106.1(16)(D)(ii), the last published special interest rate applies up to and including the month immediately preceding payment. Since the payment was made in August 2022, the Agency properly applied PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022, which declared a negative special interest rate of -15.18% for January¨CJune...

The UNAT held that the staff member¡¯s claims of fraudulent manipulation of his electronic leave records failed for want of proof.

The UNAT further held that the UNDT erred by leaving crucial factual issues unresolved, which made it impossible to determine the appeal fully. The UNAT found that the tables summarizing the staff member¡¯s sick leave records were not hearsay but qualified as business records entitled to a presumption of accuracy unless rebutted. However, the UNAT was not satisfied that these records were accurate and noted unresolved inconsistencies. Accordingly, the UNAT further...

L'UNAT a estim¨¦ que la demande de r¨¦vision devait ¨ºtre rejet¨¦e, car aucun fait nouveau et d¨¦terminant, inconnu de M. Bernard et du Tribunal d'appel au moment o¨´ l'UNAT a rendu son jugement, susceptible d'avoir une incidence significative sur l'issue dudit jugement, n'avait ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦montr¨¦.

L'UNAT a rejet¨¦ la conclusion du TDPU selon laquelle il n'¨¦tait pas clair que les questions soulev¨¦es par ABE avaient d¨¦j¨¤ ¨¦t¨¦ soulev¨¦es et tranch¨¦es dans une affaire ant¨¦rieure du TDPU concernant ABE. L'UNAT a estim¨¦ qu'il ¨¦tait clair que les questions soumises au TDPU avaient d¨¦j¨¤ ¨¦t¨¦ tranch¨¦es par le Tribunal du contentieux administratif. La question de la n¨¦gligence all¨¦gu¨¦e dans l'orientation vers des soins m¨¦dicaux ¨¦tait donc res judicata et n'aurait pas d? ¨ºtre r¨¦examin¨¦e par le TDPU dans l'affaire en appel. L'UNAT a donc souscrit ¨¤ la conclusion de l'UNDT selon laquelle la demande d...