溏心vlog免费B站

Article XI

  • Article IX
  • Article XI
  • Rule 101.2
  • Rule 106.1
  • Rule 11.1
  • Rule 11.2
  • Rule 110.1
  • Rule 110.3
  • Rule 111.1(a)
  • Rule 111.1(b)
  • Rule 111.1(e)
  • Rule 111.1(gg)
  • Rule 111.1(hh)
  • Rule 111.1(ii)
  • Rule 111.1(jj)
  • Rule 111.2
  • Rule 111.2 (e)(i)
  • Rule 111.2 (e)(ii)
  • Rule 111.2 (e)(iii)
  • Rule 111.2(a)
  • Rule 111.2(l)
  • Rule 111.2(p)
    • Showing 1 - 3 of 3
    2026-UNAT-1665, Margaret Mary Fogarty

    The UNAT held that it did not have personal jurisdiction over Ms. Fogarty because she was a former staff member of the IMO and the decision that she challenged, the IMO’s failure to investigate the Director of Administration, did not impact the terms of her former employment.The UNAT noted that it had already determined in Judgment No. 2026-UNAT-1620 that there was no negative consequence to Ms. Fogarty from the conduct that she complained of by the Director of Administration, with respect to Ms. Fogarty’s claim to Appendix D benefits. Other than the Appendix D claim, which was adjudicated...

    2026-UNAT-1620, Margaret Mary Fogarty

    The UNAT found that the neutral first instance process established by the IMO, i.e., the SAB, was properly constituted and met the requirements of Article 2(10) of the UNAT Statute. The UNAT rejected the argument that the SAB lacked neutrality. The UNAT also found that the SAB produced a sufficient written record of its Decision.

    The UNAT found that the SAB acted within the bounds of its jurisdiction and competence when it reviewed the decision of the Secretary-General on the recommendation of the ABCC. The SAB had close regard to the fact that the ABCC reached its determination on the medical...

    2021-UNAT-1117, Margaret Mary Fogarty

    UNAT held that while the SAB may satisfy the requirements of a neutral first instance process, its decision is only advisory or recommendatory. UNAT held that the facts did not disclose whether the Secretary-General of IMO had the power to amend the powers of the SAB retrospectively to permit the SAB to make a decision rather than a recommendation or, more pertinently, by subsequent fiat, to convert a recommendation of SAB into a decision. UNAT held that the source of the Secretary-General’s power to introduce interim measures was not clear and that there may be other constraints upon his...