Ãå±±½ûµØ

? 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 la raret¨¦ des commentaires positifs, compar¨¦e ¨¤ l'¨¦crasante majorit¨¦ des commentaires n¨¦gatifs, faisait de l'¨¦valuation des performances de Mme Haydar une ? d¨¦cision administrative ? ayant un impact n¨¦gatif direct sur son emploi. Le Tribunal d'appel a donc estim¨¦ que l'UNDT n'avait pas commis d'erreur en jugeant sa demande recevable.
S'agissant du bien-fond¨¦ de la demande, le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ qu'en qualifiant les performances de Mme Haydar de ? satisfaisant aux attentes en mati¨¨re de performances ?, l'administration l'avait emp¨ºch¨¦e de contester l...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the paucity of positive comments, compared with the overwhelmingly negative comments rendered Ms. Haydar¡¯s performance evaluation an ¡°administrative decision¡± with a direct adverse impact on her employment. The Appeals Tribunal thus found that the UNDT did not err in finding her application receivable.  

Turning to the merits of the application, the Appeals Tribunal found that by characterizing Ms. Haydar¡¯s performance as ¡°successfully meets performance expectations¡±, the Administration precluded her from contesting the appraisal through the rebuttal process...

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 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 Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que le TDFNU n'avait pas commis d'erreur en consid¨¦rant que le responsable du recrutement avait correctement ¨¦valu¨¦ que les certificats que la candidate s¨¦lectionn¨¦e avait mentionn¨¦s dans sa notice personnelle ¨¦taient ¨¦quivalents ¨¤ une certification Lean Six Sigma (LSS).  L'une des exigences en mati¨¨re de formation pour le poste ¨¦tait la certification LSS ou une ? certification ¨¦quivalente ?.  En l'esp¨¨ce, le Tribunal a conclu ¨¤ juste titre que le responsable du recrutement avait correctement ¨¦valu¨¦ que les certificats que la candidate s¨¦lectionn¨¦e avait mentionn¨¦s...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the UNDT did not err in holding that the Hiring Manager had correctly assessed that the certificates the selected candidate had listed in her Personal History Profile (PHP) were equivalent to a Lean Six Sigma (LSS) Certification.  One of the educational requirements for the position was the LSS certification or an ¡°equivalent certification¡±.  In the present case, the UNDT correctly concluded that the Hiring Manager had properly assessed that the certificates the selected candidate had listed in her PHP were equivalent to an LSS certification, as required for...

Le TANU a not¨¦ que l'implication de l'agent dans la fraude ¨¤ la subvention locative commise par deux demandeurs avait ¨¦t¨¦ ¨¦tablie par des preuves claires et convaincantes : l'administration avait d¨¦montr¨¦ que le montant r¨¦el pay¨¦ ¨¤ l'agent au titre du loyer mensuel n'¨¦tait pas le montant indiqu¨¦ sur le bail. En outre, le TANU a estim¨¦ que l'UNDT avait correctement d¨¦termin¨¦ qu'il avait incit¨¦ l'un des demandeurs ¨¤ pr¨¦senter une demande frauduleuse de subvention pour les honoraires d'un agent immobilier.
Le TANU a estim¨¦ que m¨ºme si le fonctionnaire n'avait pas b¨¦n¨¦fici¨¦ personnellement ou...

The UNAT noted that the staff member¡¯s involvement in rental subsidy fraud by two claimants had been established by clear and convincing evidence: the Administration had demonstrated that the actual amount paid to the staff member in monthly rent was not the amount shown on the lease. In addition, the UNAT found that the UNDT had correctly determined that he had instigated one of the claimants to submit a fraudulent claim for the subsidy for real estate agent¡¯s fees.

The UNAT held that even if the staff member had not benefitted personally or directly from the fraudulent subsidies, the...

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...

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...