Home

Results 1 - 10 of 372,722 for sharing. Search took 0.837 seconds.  
Sort by date/Sort by relevance
The UN Tax Unit has refused to share the basis for their accounting methodology over which the UN and the STL shares were calculated. Notwithstanding, the division of each entity’s share appears to be wrong. The UN Tax Unit calculated its share of the Applicant’s tax liability based on the proportion of income for which it was responsible (i.e., 72%), but calculated its share of tax credit based on the proportion of days worked (i.e., 89%). (...) The problem raised by the Applicant concerns the division of liability share between the UN and the STL calculated by the UN Tax Unit.
Language:English
Score: 397129.98 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2022-009.pdf
Data Source: oaj
UNDT/2021/079 Page 3 of 17 According to AA, the initial idea was for her, BB and the Applicant to share a hotel room in Nairobi, but since BB did not join them due to health issues, AA and the Applicant shared the same room for two nights, using separate beds. 8. (...) Heinz Commercial”; b. His sharing a hotel room with AA while travelling on official mission in Nairobi; c. (...) The Applicant does not dispute that he shared a hotel room with AA in Nairobi. The Applicant submits that this accommodation arrangement was made by AA and that he accepted it since AA insisted that she wanted to share a room to save money.
Language:English
Score: 387883.23 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2021-079.pdf
Data Source: oaj
During her period of SLWOP, she paid both her own share of contributions to the Fund as well as her employing organization’s share of contributions to the Fund, in accordance with Article 25(b)(i) of the Fund’s Regulations. 4. (...) Fox that, if she paid the member organization’s share of contributions during her period of SLWOP and subsequently elected a withdrawal settlement, the member organization’s share of contributions would not be paid out to her. (...) Fox to be paid the member organization’s share of the contributions that she paid during her SLWOP.
Language:English
Score: 379029.47 - www.un.org/en/internalj...at/judgments/2018-UNAT-834.pdf
Data Source: oaj
That same day, counsel also filed a motion seeking leave to file additional pleadings, which counsel requests, should not be shared with his client. In support of his motion, counsel explains that before the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT or Dispute Tribunal), evidence had been disclosed “for counsel’s eyes only” meaning that while counsel was permitted to view the documents, he was not permitted to retain a copy. (...) Reilly, yet to represent her interests before the UNAT, he found it necessary to prepare an appeal brief shared with Ms. Reilly that makes no reference to this material as well as an additional pleading, which would not be shared with Ms. (...) This brief will also be shared with the Respondent. 5. Pursuant to normal tribunal practice and procedure, the Respondent will have access to all appeal documents in the Appeals Tribunal’s file including the motion in support of this Order.
Language:English
Score: 377548 - www.un.org/en/internalj...orders/order-unat-2021-429.pdf
Data Source: oaj
This house was classified by SSS/UNON as a stand-alone house in a shared compound, within the meaning of the Revised Kenya MORSS. (...) On 10 August 2011, SSS/UNON approved the Applicant’s claim for the Shared Security Portion, calculated at the rate of USD800 per month. (...) When she moved to RVE, the Applicant claimed the “Shared Security Portion” and not the cost of a monthly alarm and guards’ contract.
Language:English
Score: 374424.46 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2015-007.pdf
Data Source: oaj
The Applicant states that the evidence on record does not confirm or refute whether, by 11 June 2017, when he shared his draft management evaluation request, a selection decision had been made. (...) The Tribunal notes that there is no written evidence that a selection decision was made on 11 June 2017, at the date the Applicant shared his draft management evaluation request for this alledged decision. (...) This argument lacks merit because it was the Applicant himself who unilaterally chose to share his draft management evaluation request before the first selection process was completed.
Language:English
Score: 373136.2 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2021-067.pdf
Data Source: oaj
The BOI subsequently issued a report on 22 February 2014, which the Organization never shared with the Applicant. 4. In January 2016, a Syrian refugee, S. (...) Therefore, the statement in the Note verbale that the BOI report was shared on a “strictly voluntary basis” is entirely correct. (...) Therefore, if after performing a risk assessment the Organization concludes that sharing certain internal documents or information may harm e.g. the fulfilment of its mandate, it is not obliged to share them and can exercise its privileges and immunities under the Convention. 34.
Language:English
Score: 371949.78 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2017-091.pdf
Data Source: oaj
On 26 November 2009, the Secretary of HLCM informed the President of FICSA that it had not been able to reach an agreement on cost sharing. After considering other possibilities with the Human Resources Network (HR Network), HLCM confirmed, on 15 March 2010, that the cost-sharing proposal had been rejected. 10. (...) When there are financial issues of this type, FICSA member organizations have agreed that they would share the costs involved and that, in the absence of an agreement, the releasing organization would be responsible for all costs. (...) In particular, the Secretary-General claims that any decision on funding, whether initially or under a cost-sharing arrangement, is solely up to the releasing organization. 26.
Language:English
Score: 370945.6 - www.un.org/en/internalj...t/judgments/2012-unat-239e.pdf
Data Source: oaj
This house was classified by SSS/UNON as a stand-alone house in a shared compound, within the meaning of the Revised Kenya MORSS. As per the MORSS, residents of shared compounds are not entitled to claim the MRSA for guard and alarm contracts nor the additional MRSA of 40,000 shillings per month (...) … On 10 August 2011, SSS/UNON approved the Applicant’s claim for the Shared Security Portion, calculated at the rate of USD 800 per month.
Language:English
Score: 368438.57 - www.un.org/en/internalj...at/judgments/2015-UNAT-599.pdf
Data Source: oaj
The evidence also indicated that the Applicant, in conjunction with other key witnesses in the investigation, actively and unduly tried to influence the course of the OIOS investigation by, prior to the OIOS interviews, aligning their individual statements made to OIOS during interviews, and/or consulting with the Applicant as to which selective information would be shared with OIOS during the interviews, and maintaining an online shared drive containing key dates and evidence, by which they shared only selected information with OIOS.2 8. (...) It is common cause that when the allegations of sexual misconduct first surfaced, a shared Google drive was set up on the instance of the Applicant. (...) He partially reaffirmed this in his evidence in chief in which he states that the Google drive was set up for collection and sharing of information in a shared facility which they could all access whenever they needed to. 51.
Language:English
Score: 367523.5 - www.un.org/en/internalj...dt/judgments/undt-2021-078.pdf
Data Source: oaj