ÉñÂíÎçÒ¹¸£ÀûÍø

Les faits incontest¨¦s sont sans ambigu?t¨¦ et laissent peu de place ¨¤ des interpr¨¦tations diff¨¦rentes. Des excuses n'invalident ni n'annulent la faute commise. Le fait que la requ¨¦rante n'ait pas ¨¦t¨¦ inform¨¦e de l'impact n¨¦gatif de sa pratique n'a aucune incidence sur la d¨¦termination des faits. Ainsi, l'administration a ¨¦tabli les faits qui sous-tendent la mesure disciplinaire en question par pr¨¦pond¨¦rance de preuve.

Le fait que la requ¨¦rante ait utilis¨¦ des jurons ¨¤ l'¨¦gard de ses subordonn¨¦s et qu'elle se soit largement adress¨¦e ¨¤ ses coll¨¨gues par des surnoms sur le lieu de travail a ¨¦t¨¦...

Bien qu'il n'y ait malheureusement pas de t¨¦moin oculaire de l'agression physique en question ni de cam¨¦ra de s¨¦curit¨¦ qui aurait pu filmer l'agression, le plaignant a fourni, sous serment, un r¨¦cit d¨¦taill¨¦ et coh¨¦rent de l'agression physique en question, des circonstances qui l'ont provoqu¨¦e et de ses cons¨¦quences. Son r¨¦cit de l'agression physique et des ¨¦v¨¦nements qui ont suivi est corrobor¨¦ par les t¨¦moignages d'autres personnes, les preuves documentaires et/ou le comportement contemporain du requ¨¦rant, c'est-¨¤-dire sa tentative d'apporter des boissons non alcoolis¨¦es ¨¤ la plaignante...

While regrettably there is neither an eyewitness to the physical assault in question nor any security camera that could have captured the assault on video, the complainant provided, under oath, a detailed and coherent account of the physical assault in question, the circumstances leading to it and its aftermath. His account of the physical assault and subsequent events is corroborated by other witnesses¡¯ testimonies, the documentary evidence and/or the Applicant¡¯s contemporaneous behaviour, i.e., his attempt to bring some soft drinks to the complainant a few hours after the physical assault...

The undisputed facts are unambiguous and leave little room for different interpretations. An apology does not invalidate or undo the misconduct. The fact that the Applicant was not made aware of the negative impact of her practice has no relevance for the factual determination. As such, the Administration has established the facts underlying the disciplinary measure in question by preponderance of evidence.

The Applicant using expletives towards her subordinates and widely addressing her colleagues by nicknames in the workplace were compounded by her ignoring personal and professional...

Le Tribunal a not¨¦ que, premi¨¨rement, le requ¨¦rant ne conteste pas une d¨¦cision administrative prise par le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral en tant que chef de l'administration de l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Deuxi¨¨mement, la FAO n'a pas conclu d'accord sp¨¦cial avec le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral, en vertu de l'art. 2.5 du Statut du Tribunal, pour accepter les termes de la comp¨¦tence du Tribunal.
Par cons¨¦quent, le Tribunal a estim¨¦ qu'il n'¨¦tait pas comp¨¦tent pour examiner la pr¨¦sente requ¨ºte.

The Tribunal noted that, firstly, the Applicant does not contest an administrative decision taken by the Secretary-General as the Chief Administrative Officer of the United Nations. Secondly, FAO has not concluded a special agreement with the Secretary-General, under art. 2.5 of the Tribunal's Statute, to accept the terms of the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Consequently, the Tribunal found that it was not competent to examine the present application.

Le second notateur de la requ¨¦rante a le pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire de faire des commentaires sur ses performances. "Faire des commentaires dans un ePAS sur la n¨¦cessit¨¦ pour un membre du personnel d'am¨¦liorer ses performances en ce qui concerne certaines valeurs et comp¨¦tences fondamentales est un outil important qui permet aux cadres d'exercer leurs fonctions dans l'int¨¦r¨ºt de l'Organisation et, par cons¨¦quent, leur volont¨¦ de le faire doit ¨ºtre soutenue et stimul¨¦e". Il s'agit d'un exercice l¨¦gitime d'¨¦valuation des employ¨¦s par la hi¨¦rarchie administrative.
Les commentaires en question ne...

It is within the discretion of the Applicant¡¯s SRO to make comments on her performance. ¡°[M]aking comments in an ePAS about the need for a staff member to improve performance in certain core values and competencies is an important tool for the managers to carry out their functions in the interest of the Organization and, hence, their willingness to do so need to be supported and boosted¡±. It represents a legitimate exercise of administrative hierarchy evaluating employees.

The comments in question do not detract from the overall satisfactory performance appraisal. They are constructive...

Le dossier contient suffisamment de preuves documentaires montrant que le requ¨¦rant a ¨¦t¨¦ correctement inform¨¦ des lacunes en mati¨¨re de performances qu'il devait corriger et am¨¦liorer. Il a ¨¦t¨¦ plac¨¦ dans un PIP structur¨¦ et con?u sp¨¦cifiquement pour lui, et il a b¨¦n¨¦fici¨¦ d'un soutien et de conseils ad¨¦quats pour s'am¨¦liorer.
Les r¨¨gles applicables ayant permis d'identifier, de documenter et de traiter les lacunes du requ¨¦rant en mati¨¨re de performances, la d¨¦cision de ne pas renouveler son CDD pour cause de services insatisfaisants, prise apr¨¨s qu'il a ¨¦t¨¦ constat¨¦ que le requ¨¦rant n'avait...

There is sufficient documentary evidence on record showing that the Applicant was properly made aware of the performance shortcomings he needed to address and improve. He was placed on a PIP that was structured and designed specifically for him, and he was provided with adequate support and guidance to improve.

Having identified, documented, and addressed the Applicant¡¯s performance shortcomings through the applicable rules, the decision not to renew his FTA based on unsatisfactory service, taken after the Applicant was found not to have improved his performance despite being given the...

Promesse de renouvellement faite au requ¨¦rant

La d¨¦claration verbale g¨¦n¨¦rale faite par le CITO/ASG ne constituait pas une promesse expresse de renouveler l'engagement ¨¤ dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e du requ¨¦rant. Elle ne contenait pas les ¨¦l¨¦ments essentiels d'une offre de renouvellement correcte et concr¨¨te, tels que la dur¨¦e de la prolongation et le nom de la personne nomm¨¦e. La jurisprudence exige en outre que la promesse de renouvellement d'un engagement ¨¤ dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e soit faite par ¨¦crit.

Il n'existe aucune preuve d'un engagement ferme de renouveler l'engagement ¨¤ dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e du requ¨¦rant...

Whether the Applicant was promised a renewal

The general verbal statement made by the CITO/ASG did not constitute an express promise to renew the Applicant¡¯s fixed-term appointment. It lacked the essential elements of a proper and concrete offer of renewal, such as the duration of the extension and the name of the appointee. The jurisprudence further requires a promise to renew a fixed-term appointment to be in writing.

There is no evidence of a firm commitment to renew the Applicant¡¯s fixed-term appointment. While the Applicant sought to rely on the CITO/ASG¡¯s verbal statements in March...

La question de savoir si le demandeur s'est vu promettre un renouvellement

La d¨¦claration verbale g¨¦n¨¦rale faite par le CITO/ASG en mars 2022 ne pouvait constituer une promesse expresse de renouveler l¡¯engagement de dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e du Requ¨¦rant. Il lui manquait les ¨¦l¨¦ments essentiels d'une offre de renouvellement appropri¨¦e et concr¨¨te, tels que la dur¨¦e de la prolongation et le nom de la personne nomm¨¦e. La jurisprudence exige en outre qu'une promesse de renouvellement d'un engagement de dur¨¦e d¨¦termin¨¦e soit faite par ¨¦crit (voir Kellie, par. 44). Contrairement ¨¤ ce que sugg¨¨re la...

Whether the Applicant was promised a renewal

The general verbal statement made by the CITO/ASG in March 2022 could not have constituted an express promise to renew the Applicant¡¯s fixed-term appointment. It lacked the essential elements of a proper and concrete offer of renewal, such as the duration of the extension and the name of the appointee. The jurisprudence further requires a promise to renew a fixed-term appointment to be in writing (see Kellie, para. 44). Contrary to the Applicant¡¯s suggestion, the verbal statement was not sufficient to support a firm commitment or an entitlement to...

Ayant re?u la notification de la mesure disciplinaire le 20 mars 2023, le requ¨¦rant aurait d? d¨¦poser sa demande au plus tard le 19 juin 2023. Les preuves au dossier montrent cependant que le requ¨¦rant n'a d¨¦pos¨¦ sa requ¨ºte que le 21 juin 2023.

Dans ses observations dat¨¦es du 17 juillet 2023, le requ¨¦rant reconna?t son retard et demande au Tribunal de recevoir exceptionnellement sa demande pour plusieurs raisons. Ces raisons ne sont pas ¨¦tay¨¦es par des preuves et le requ¨¦rant n'a pas expliqu¨¦ comment les difficult¨¦s all¨¦gu¨¦es ont eu un impact sur sa capacit¨¦ ¨¤ d¨¦poser sa demande dans les...

Les documents au dossier, et en particulier le pr¨¦avis de licenciement, montrent que le requ¨¦rant ¨¦tait employ¨¦ par une soci¨¦t¨¦ priv¨¦e. Hormis la d¨¦claration non ¨¦tay¨¦e du requ¨¦rant dans son formulaire de renseignements personnels lors du d¨¦p?t de ses observations, selon laquelle son bureau de travail ¨¦tait le "CCI", il n'y a aucune preuve au dossier montrant qu'il a une relation contractuelle avec l'Organisation des Nations Unies au sens de l'article 3 du Statut du Tribunal. 3 du Statut du Tribunal. En tant que tel, le requ¨¦rant n'a pas de locus standi devant ce Tribunal.

En outre, si le...

The documents on file, and in particular the notice of dismissal, show that the Applicant was employed by a private company. Other than the Applicant¡¯s unsupported statement in his personal details form when filing his submissions that his Office of employment was ¡°ITC¡±, there is no evidence on record showing that he has any contractual relationship with the United Nations within the meaning of art. 3 of the Tribunal¡¯s Statute. As such, the Applicant has no locus standi before this Tribunal.

Moreover, while the Applicant is contesting a disciplinary measure, it was imposed neither by the...

Having received the notification of the disciplinary measure on 20 March 2023, the Applicant should have filed his application at the latest by 19 June 2023. The evidence on record shows, however, that the Applicant only filed his application on 21 June 2023.

In his submission dated 17 July 2023, the Applicant recognized his lateness and asked the Tribunal to exceptionally receive his application for several reasons. These reasons are not supported by evidence, and the Applicant did not explain how the alleged challenges impacted his ability to timely file his application.

While there are...