The UNAT refused the Appellant’s request for an oral hearing because it would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case”, (Article 18(1) UNAT Rules). UNAT agreed with UNDT that there were “inordinate delays both at reviewing and assessing the complaint and in setting [up] a fact-finding panel and conducting the investigation itself” and that UNAMA was in breach of ST/SGB/2008/5. UNAT also agreed with the Secretary-General that the Appellant failed to demonstrate on appeal any error by the UNDT that would justify the reversal of its judgment. UNAT found that the Appellant’s...
Article 18
-
Article 1.2(c)
1
-
Article 10.1
2
-
Article 10.2
9
-
Article 10.5
10
-
Article 10.5(a)
5
-
Article 10.5(b)
5
-
Article 10.6
9
-
Article 10.8
1
-
Article 10.9
6
-
Article 11
29
-
Article 11.1
49
-
Article 11.2
11
-
Article 11.3
22
-
Article 11.4
14
-
Article 18
1
-
Article 18.1
6
-
Article 2
25
-
Article 2.1
153
-
Article 2.1
7
-
Article 2.1(a)
19
-
Article 2.1(b)
4
-
Article 2.1(c)
3
-
Article 2.1(d)
23
-
Article 2.1(e)
32
-
Article 2.10
35
-
Article 2.2
5
-
Article 2.2(a)
2
-
Article 2.3
18
-
Article 2.4(b)
8
-
Article 2.5
62
-
Article 2.6
2
-
Article 2.7
1
-
Article 2.8
1
-
Article 2.9
20
-
Article 2.9(a)
1
-
Article 2(b)
1
-
Article 2(c)
2
-
Article 2(e)
5
-
Article 24
1
-
Article 3.2
1
-
Article 4
2
-
Article 5
2
-
Article 6
1
-
Article 6.2
1
-
Article 7
11
-
Article 7.1
13
-
Article 7.1(c)
10
-
Article 7.2
3
-
Article 7.3
8
-
Article 7.4
3
-
Article 7.5
9
-
Article 8
1
-
Article 8.1
5
-
Article 8.1(c)
8
-
Article 8.1(d)(i)(b)
1
-
Article 8.2
11
-
Article 8.3
81
-
Article 9
13
-
Article 9.1
11
-
Article 9.1(a)
23
-
Article 9.1(b)
22
-
Article 9.2
33
-
Article 9.3
3
-
Article 9.4
4
-
Article 9.5
16
-
Article 9(b)
1
Showing 1 - 1 of 1