On 16 October 2020, the Applicant filed a motion for production of
documents. In the said motion, the Applicant seeks the production of all documents
related to the disciplinary sanction imposed on three other staff members investigated
in connection with the Applicant’s case “in order to reassess what is alleged against
him, for his defence”. (...) UNDT/NBI/2019/108
Order No. 212 (NBI/2020)
Page 3 of 5
c. the requested documentation is confidential and its production would
violate the rights of individuals who are not party to the present proceedings.
(...) Pursuant to art 9.1 of the UNDT Statute, the UNDT may “order production of
documents or such other evidence as it deems necessary”.
Language:English
Score: 434567.5
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...s/undt/orders/nbi-2020-212.pdf
Data Source: oaj
If there were such an entitlement, he or she would not need to request the
Tribunal to order production and could simply rely on the legal right. (...) Sometimes the
party seeking production will not know its contents though it appears to belong to a
class of documents likely to be relevant. In such a case it will very likely be “fair” to
require production. In cases of sensitivity it may be that production in the first
instance is made to the Tribunal and the judge order access to be given or refused
after he or she has inspected the document.
Language:English
Score: 424906.5
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2009-024.pdf
Data Source: oaj
The Applicant’s principal contentions regarding circumstances for the
production of the Further Information may be summarized as follows:
a. (...) Arrangements will be made for the secure and in-person transmittal of
the final work product to OHRM at Headquarters in New York;
l. (...) An order
concerning the production of any document over which confidentiality is sought
Case No.
Language:English
Score: 421637.84
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2011-069.pdf
Data Source: oaj
SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
ORDER ON APPLICANT’S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE
Counsel for the Applicant:
Monika Bileris
Counsel for the Respondent:
Susan Maddox, ALS/OHRM
Case No. (...) In his submissions, the Applicant also requested the Tribunal to make three
orders requiring the production of additional evidence.
5. In light of the Tribunal’s decisions on these requests the Respondent was not
called on to respond.
(...) As its
probative value is unclear the Tribunal will order its production, initially on an ex
parte basis for the Tribunal to evaluate and make a final decision on its admissibility.
16.
Language:English
Score: 417523.1
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...s/undt/orders/nbi-2015-309.pdf
Data Source: oaj
SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
RULING ON PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Counsel for applicant:
Francois Loriot
Counsel for respondent:
Susan Maddox, ALS
Case No. (...) Nor does it suggest that the jurisdiction of
the Tribunal to order the production of documents is limited in the way suggested.
(...) The DTS in art 9 gives power
in unqualified language to require the production of documents –
[9] 1. The Dispute Tribunal may order production of documents or
such other evidence as it deems necessary
Language:English
Score: 415415.97
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...es/undt/orders/ny-2010-059.pdf
Data Source: oaj
SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
ORDER ON THE APPLICANT’S
APPLICATION FOR PRODUCTION OF
EVIDENCE
Counsel for Applicant:
Adolph Bishanga
Counsel for Respondent:
Stephen Margetts, ALS/OHRM, UN Secretariat.
(...) Introduction
1.1 By Application dated 18 May 2010, the Applicant requests the Tribunal to order
the production of the following documents which are in the possession of the
Respondent.
(...) Considerations
2.1 The Tribunal, having considered the parties’ submissions and pursuant to Article
18(1) of the UNDT Rules of Procedure, finds that the documents sought by the
Applicant are not relevant to any issue in the proceeding and,
REJECTS the Applicant’s Motion requesting the Tribunal to order the production of the
evidence.
Language:English
Score: 412381.93
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...s/undt/orders/nbi-2010-084.pdf
Data Source: oaj
On 23 June 2015, before the reply was filed, the Applicant filed a motion
requesting leave of the Tribunal to file a 16-page motion for production of evidence
by the Respondent, attaching the said 16-page motion.
4. (...) On 7 July 2015, the Tribunal issued Order No. 133 (NY/2015) directing that
the Applicant file a response to the Respondent's reply by 6 August 2015, and placing
the Applicant's motion for production of evidence in abeyance until further notice.
6. (...) Furthermore, the Applicant's motions for production and for discovery and
disclosure, shall be deferred to be dealt with by the Judge assigned the case in due
course.
Language:English
Score: 412381.93
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...es/undt/orders/ny-2015-223.pdf
Data Source: oaj
It considered
that in this case, the judge had sufficient grounds to order the production of
documents withheld by the Administration concerning the process that had led to the
contested administrative decision. (...) Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the UNDT reads as follows: “The Dispute
Tribunal may order production of documents or such other evidence as it deems necessary.”
(...) The
Tribunal is entitled to order the production of any document relevant to that end.
40.
Language:English
Score: 412362.3
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...tucci) English Translation.pdf
Data Source: oaj
It considered
that in this case, the judge had sufficient grounds to order the production of
documents withheld by the Administration concerning the process that had led to the
contested administrative decision. (...) Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the UNDT reads as follows: “The Dispute
Tribunal may order production of documents or such other evidence as it deems necessary.”
(...) The
Tribunal is entitled to order the production of any document relevant to that end.
40.
Language:English
Score: 412362.3
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...t/judgments/2011-unat-121e.pdf
Data Source: oaj
SECRETARY-GENERAL
OF THE UNITED NATIONS
ORDER ON
APPLICANT’S MOTION FOR
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
AND
CASE MANAGEMENT
Counsel for Applicant:
Self-represented
Counsel for Respondent:
Bettina Gerber, UNOG
Case No. (...) The Applicant on 4 October 2012 filed a motion for production of
documents. On 8 February 2013, the Respondent was instructed to respond to the
Applicant’s motion and on 5 March 2013, the Respondent filed a response.
4. (...) Therefore, the Tribunal finds that the production of the
written tests to the Applicant is not necessary for a fair disposal of this case.
Language:English
Score: 412179.8
-
www.un.org/en/internalj...s/undt/orders/gva-2013-051.pdf
Data Source: oaj