鶹ý

  • Appendix B
  • Chapter IV
  • Chapter IX
  • Chapter VII
  • Chapter X
  • Chapter XI
  • Rule 1.2(h)
  • Rule 10.2
  • Rule 10.2(a)(ix)
  • Rule 10.3(a)
  • Rule 10.4(c)
  • Rule 10.4b
  • Rule 101.1
  • Rule 101.2(2)
  • Rule 101.2(a)
  • Rule 101.2(b)
  • Rule 101.2(c)
  • Rule 101.2(d)
  • Rule 101.2(g)
  • Rule 101.2(h)
  • Rule 101.4(a)
  • Rule 103.13
  • Rule 103.20
  • Rule 103.21(a)
  • Rule 103.24
  • Rule 103.24(a)
  • Rule 103.7(d)(ii)
  • Rule 103.9
  • Rule 103.9(a)
  • Rule 104.1
  • Rule 104.10
  • Rule 104.10(a)
  • Rule 104.12
  • Rule 104.12(a)
  • Rule 104.12(b)
  • Rule 104.12(b)(i)
  • Rule 104.12(b)(ii)
  • Rule 104.12(b)(iii)
  • Rule 104.13
  • Rule 104.13(a)
  • Rule 104.13(c)
  • Rule 104.14
  • Rule 104.14(a)(i)
  • Rule 104.14(h)(i)
  • Rule 104.15
  • Rule 104.15(b)(i)
  • Rule 104.3
  • Rule 104.4
  • Rule 104.4(e)
  • Rule 104.6
  • Rule 104.6(b)
  • Rule 104.7
  • Rule 104.7(a)
  • Rule 104.8
  • Rule 105
  • Rule 105.1(b)
  • Rule 105.1(b)(iii)
  • Rule 105.1(c)
  • Rule 105.2
  • Rule 105.2(a)
  • Rule 105.2(a)(i)
  • Rule 105.2(a)(ii)
  • Rule 105.2(a)(iii)b
  • Rule 105.3
  • Rule 105.3(d)
  • Rule 105.3(d)(iii)
  • Rule 106.2
  • Rule 106.2(a)
  • Rule 106.2(c)
  • Rule 106.2(g)
  • Rule 106.6
  • Rule 107
  • Rule 107.1
  • Rule 107.21
  • Rule 107.21(h)
  • Rule 107.27
  • Rule 107.28
  • Rule 107.28(c)
  • Rule 107.4(b)
  • Rule 107.6
  • Rule 108.1
  • Rule 108.2
  • Rule 109.1
  • Rule 109.1(b)
  • Rule 109.1(c)
  • Rule 109.1(c)(i)
  • Rule 109.1(c)(ii)(a)
  • Rule 109.15
  • Rule 109.3
  • Rule 109.5(h)
  • Rule 109.7
  • Rule 109.7(a)
  • Rule 109.8
  • Rule 11.2
  • Rule 11.2(c)
  • Rule 110.1
  • Rule 110.2
  • Rule 110.2(a)
  • Rule 110.3
  • Rule 110.3(a)
  • Rule 110.3(a)(i)
  • Rule 110.3(a)(iv)
  • Rule 110.3(a)(viii)
  • Rule 110.3(b)
  • Rule 110.3(b)(i)
  • Rule 110.3(vii)
  • Rule 110.4
  • Rule 110.4(a)
  • Rule 110.4(c)
  • Rule 110.7
  • Rule 110.7(b)
  • Rule 111
  • Rule 111.1
  • Rule 111.2
  • Rule 111.2(a)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(f)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(i)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(i)(ii)
  • Rule 111.2(a)(ii)
  • Rule 111.2(c)
  • Rule 111.2(c)(iii)
  • Rule 111.2(e)
  • Rule 111.2(f)
  • Rule 111.2(p)
  • Rule 111.2(q)
  • Rule 111.4(b)
  • Rule 112.2
  • Rule 112.2(a)
  • Rule 112.2(b)
  • Rule 112.2(f)
  • Rule 112.3
  • Rule 112.7
  • Rule 200.2(b)
  • Rule 204.3
  • Rule 204.3(d)
  • Rule 205.3(a)(iii)
  • Rule 208.5(a)
  • Rule 209.2(a)
  • Rule 209.2(c)
  • Rule 209.5
  • Rule 3
  • Rule 3.13(a)(iii)
  • Rule 3.17(c)(ii)
  • Rule 301.1
  • Rule 301.3
  • Rule 301.3(d)
  • Rule 301.3(q)(ii)
  • Rule 301.4
  • Rule 304.1
  • Rule 304.3
  • Rule 304.4
  • Rule 304.4(a)
  • Rule 304.4(b)
  • Rule 304(a)
  • Rule 309.2
  • Rule 309.3
  • Rule 309.4
  • Rule 309.5(a)
  • Rule 309.5(b)
  • Rule 310.1
  • Rule 310.1(e)(ii)
  • Rule 310.1(e)(iv)
  • Rule 311.1
  • Rule 312.6
  • Rule 4.17
  • Rule 4.4(b)
  • Rule 5.3
    • Showing 1 - 2 of 2

    UNDT/2023/082, Munywoki

    Aggravating/mitigating factors Compensation

    The Tribunal, based on the evidence on the record, established that there was clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant was involved in the fraudulent scheme and in the attempt to interfere with the investigation into that scheme by inducing a witness to lie to investigators.

    Regarding misconduct, the Tribunal concluded that it was clear that the established facts qualified as serious misconduct.

    On the due process prong, the Tribunal concluded that the Applicant’s due process rights were respected during the investigation and disciplinary process.

    On whether the sanction was...

    Full judgment
    Case digest

    UNDT/2013/076, Mboya

    Disciplinary matters / misconduct Dismissal/separation Due process Termination (of appointment) Summary dismissal

    Due Process: UNAT concluded in Molari that “disciplinary cases are not criminal.” So therefore the right and rules pertaining to self-incrimination are purely associated with criminal procedure and therefore does not apply in this instance which is a disciplinary case. The Tribunal finds that she was provided systematically with the evidence, including the payslips in the course of the interview, in addition to an opportunity to review the record of interview. Ultra vires: In this case the person who took the decision as recorded in the letter of dismissal was the Under Secretary-General for...

    Full judgment
    Case digest