text: Applicant's medical evaluation entails the legal responsibility of the Organization. The Tribunal considers that under the circumstances of this case, the Applicant should be awarded monetary compensation for the direct material and moral injury to which he was subjected. The Tribunal fixes the amount of compensation at six months net base salary. XVII.The Applicant submits a claim for compensation for medical malpractice by the doctors involved. The Tribunal finds that the compensation awarded in the preceding paragraph is adequate relief for the errors in connection with the Applicant's medical classification. The Tribunal does not find, on the facts of this case, any medical malpractice. XVIII.The Applicant also claims compensation because his separation on medical grounds was discriminatory. After reviewing all the information before it, the Tribunal does not find any evidence that the contested decision was vitiated by discrimination or motivated by prejudice or any extraneous factor. On the contrary, the- 15 - available evidence shows that the Respondent extended the Applicant's contract on compassionate grounds until 31 May 1985, to settle his personal affairs and the Respondent made a reasonable offer in good faith to reinstate the Applicant on full pay as of 1 June 1985. XIX.The Applicant complains that the Respondent introduced into his appeal before the JAB new and unrelated facts, contrary to staff rule 111.2(h). The Tribunal notes indeed that, during the proceedings before the JAB, new issues were raised by the Respondent, which the Applicant asserted he had not appealed to the JAB, and the JAB exercised jurisdiction over them. These issues involve: (a)A dispute over the settlement of some pending entitlements due to the Applicant upon separation, consisting of an insurance claim and destination charges in respect of his unaccompanied shipment; and (b)An administrative decision conveyed to the Applicant on
analysis: The text appears to be a legal document, specifically a tribunal's decision regarding a medical professional's case. The language used is formal and technical, indicating a legal or administrative context. The discussion revolves around medical malpractice, compensation, and employment-related issues, suggesting that the category would likely fall under employment or health.