Home

Results 1 - 10 of 175,028 for launched. Search took 0.571 seconds.  
Sort by date/Sort by relevance
The decision by the UNAMA senior mission management to stop the recruitment process 74088 and to launch a new recruitment process with slightly changed TORs (new process 97210). (...) The Tribunal finds that the Applicant’s request in connection with JO 74088 and the launching of JO 97210 is not receivable ratione materiae. 12. (...) The Tribunal finds that the Applicant’s request in connection with JO 74088 and the launching of JO 97210 is not receivable ratione materiae. 12.
Language:English
Score: 552042.1 - www.un.org/en/internalj...s/undt/orders/gva-2018-131.pdf
Data Source: oaj
The vacancy announcement for the position had been re-launched as vacancy announcement number 09-ADM-UNON-419783-R-NAIROBI for Procurement Assistant-G7. (...) On 20 August 2009, the Applicant was invited to attend an interview scheduled to take place on 26 August 2009 but later rescheduled for 31 August 2009 in respect of the re-launched vacancy announcement to which she had applied. 1.6. (...) While the Applicant is perfectly entitled to become a candidate in the re-launched advertisement for the new position she seeks, it is only fair that she does so without abusing the process of this Tribunal.
Language:English
Score: 544454.3 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2009-020.pdf
Data Source: oaj
The contested administrative decision cancelling the recruitment process simultaneously discontinued Hussein’s Special Post Allowance (SPA) and re-launched the vacancy announcement. 4. Hussein’s appeal was transferred, on 1 July 2009, from the JAB to the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT). In a reply filed on 4 August 2009, the Secretary-General stated that Hussein’s SPA had been reinstated, leaving only the issue of the cancellation and re- launch of the vacancy announcement in contention. (...) While the Applicant is perfectly entitled to become a candidate in the re- launched advertisement for the new position she seeks, it is only fair that she does so without abusing the process of this Tribunal. 7.
Language:English
Score: 526540.6 - www.un.org/en/internalj...at/judgments/2010-unat-006.pdf
Data Source: oaj
According to the Respondent, from then on UN-Habitat determined that rather than launching an investigation, it would request OIOS to conduct an audit of the programme and instructed OIOS to do so. (...) By email of 11 July 2013, the Applicant requested OIOS to inform him whether and—in the affirmative, when—OIOS had launched an investigation into his report, and to be informed about the status and outcome of such an investigation. (...) The Tribunal holds that the OIOS Auditing Report is not relevant for the adjudication of the present application which challenges OIOS decision not to launch an investigation following the Applicant’s report.
Language:English
Score: 501257.23 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2014-123.pdf
Data Source: oaj
No possibility exists under ST/AI/371/Amend.1 to withdraw the charges and launch a new investigation into the same allegations. (...) In the present case the Applicant contests the decisions to re-launch the investigation following withdrawal of the charges of misconduct and to interview him without allowing access to Counsel. (...) It ought to be stated here that the Tribunal considers that the decisions to re- launch the investigation and to interview the Applicant in the absence of his Counsel Case No.
Language:English
Score: 490764.4 - www.un.org/en/internalj...es/undt/orders/ny-2011-093.pdf
Data Source: oaj
… According to the Respondent, from then on UN-Habitat determined that rather than launching an investigation, it would request OIOS to conduct an audit of the programme and instructed OIOS to do so. (...) In the negative, he also asked to be informed about the reasons for OIOS not having launched an investigation. … OIOS responded to [Mr. (...) Staedtler] filed a request for management evaluation of the “Respondent’s decision not to launch an investigation of the reported misconduct and prohibited activities, not to provide [Mr.
Language:English
Score: 489802.64 - www.un.org/en/internalj...at/judgments/2015-UNAT-578.pdf
Data Source: oaj
Notably, the Ethics Office also concluded that the Applicant’s claim that the EC, UNDP, was responsible for launching the OAI investigation into him in connection with the alleged incident during the IEA Workshop in Paris, was entirely speculative. 6. (...) OAI’s decision from 6 January 2020 to not launch an independent review of its investigation in Case No. (...) The Applicant’s claim that the decision to launch the investigation registered under Case No.
Language:English
Score: 488080.9 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2021-166.pdf
Data Source: oaj
If that is not possible, to give him absolute priority for any level P-4 post of Chief or Deputy Chief of Security within the Department of Safety and Security; c. To launch an internal review of the Department of Safety and Security to identify and ameliorate the mechanisms that allowed the commission of such an unlawful act and determine individual accountability. 3. (...) To grant him absolute priority for every P-4 post becoming vacant in the field of security would ultimately violate the rights of other candidates; c. Launching an internal review of the Department of Safety and Security would not constitute remedial action vis-à-vis the Applicant. (...) As for the Applicant’s claim that the Tribunal order the Secretary-General to launch an internal review of the Department of Safety and Security so as to identify and ameliorate the mechanisms that allowed such an unlawful act to be committed, the Tribunal’s function is a judicial one of upholding the individual rights of staff member applicants, and it has no power, therefore, even where it finds lacunae in the workings of the Organization, to compel the Administration to take corrective action.
Language:English
Score: 476727.25 - www.un.org/en/internalj...t/judgments/undt-2011-014e.pdf
Data Source: oaj
On 29 August 2017, in response to the Applicant’s inquiry, OAI informed him that the decision not to launch a formal investigation was taken because “a deep assessment [had] not established any wrongdoing from [his] part”. (...) On 8 August 2019, the Applicant filed a request for management evaluation of the decision to not launch an investigation into his complaint against Ms. (...) In the assessment report, OIOS determined that there were insufficient grounds to launch an investigation against Ms. A since after a thorough analysis of the OAI case file, OIOS disagreed with OAI’s assessment that Ms.
Language:English
Score: 470451.5 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2021-037.pdf
Data Source: oaj
Postica was an appealable administrative decision as the launching of a disciplinary investigation concerned rights of the accused staff members. (...) We quote:1 Nothing in this definition appears to limit the Tribunal’s authority in terms of considering an application from a staff member who wishes to appeal an administrative decision to launch a disciplinary investigation into her affairs, which, in addition to being procedurally flawed, may also be tainted by bad faith and/or ulterior motives. (...) Postica submit that there is no clearly stated statutory or judicial authority that renders an application against the launching of an investigation non-receivable. Requiring staff to wait until they appeal the disciplinary sanction to challenge the decision to investigate would create a carte blanche for the Administration to use the threat of investigation to intimidate staff from disclosing administrative wrongdoings, knowing that even a retaliatory investigation of staff is beyond judicial review as long as the Administration takes no further action after the investigation is closed.
Language:English
Score: 464875.5 - www.un.org/en/internalj...at/judgments/2015-UNAT-509.pdf
Data Source: oaj