2023-UNAT-1337, Louis Savadogo
The UNAT affirmed the decision of the ITLOS JAB, holding that the ITLOS was not obliged to conclude the recruitment exercise once it had begun, and that it had the authority to cancel the process. The UNAT was concerned by the change to the recruitment procedure during the course of the contested recruitment, but could not discern how this affected Mr. Savadogo¡¯s candidacy. The UNAT agreed with the ITLOS JAB that Mr. Savadogo¡¯s allegations of bias against the Registrar in the recruitment were countered by the fact that the President of ITLOS made the significant decisions in the recruitment...
2023-UNAT-1321, Diana Kenoly, Carolyne Alany Rumah, Felix Kwame and Nicholas Kariuki Kinyanjui in respect of Roselyne Kayeke Oming (deceased)
The UNAT dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal.
As to the Secretary-General's cross-appeal against the UNDT's decision on receivability, the UNAT held that the UNDT was correct not to dismiss the claims as unreceivable, but to investigate their merits.
Turning to the merits, the UNAT noted that death benefits under the Rules are not payable to beneficiaries nominated by a staff member, but to designated beneficiaries as defined by the Staff Rules (i.e. the surviving spouse or dependent children). The UNAT found that Mr. Oming survived Ms. Oming and the substantial preponderance of...
2023-UNAT-1312, RoseMarie Heftberger
UNAT held that the Appellant¡¯s consent to foregoing an in-person hearing was not required, pursuant to Rule 22 of the ICAO Appeals Board Rules and ICAO Staff Rule 111.1(18). The Appellant was advised by the ICAO Appeals Board of its intention to proceed with a summary decision and she participated in this process by making submissions without objecting to it. Therefore, it was not an error of law for the Appeals Board of ICAO to have considered and decided the summary judgment without an in-person hearing but otherwise in compliance with due process requirements of participation therein by...
2022-UNAT-1310, Gudrun Fosse
Unat a constat¨¦ que l'UNDT a conclu correctement que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e de ne pas initier une enqu¨ºte due ¨¤ la d¨¦mission de son SRO ¨¦tait l¨¦gale dans le cadre d'un exercice raisonnable du pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire. Bien que le terme ?¨¦valuation pr¨¦liminaire? dans ST / SGB / 2019/8 n'ait pas ¨¦t¨¦ sp¨¦cifiquement utilis¨¦ dans la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e, il ¨¦tait clair que la plainte de Mme Fosse ¨¦tait pr¨¦liminairement ¨¦valu¨¦e avant que la d¨¦cision ne soit prise qu'aucune enqu¨ºte ne serait entreprise. Alors que le Bulletin pr¨¦c¨¦dent (ST / SGB / 2008/5) peut avoir ¨¦t¨¦ en vigueur lorsqu'elle a d¨¦pos¨¦ sa...
2022-UNAT-1310, Gudrun Fosse
UNAT found that the UNDT correctly concluded that the contested decision not to initiate an investigation due to the resignation of her SRO was lawful as part of a reasonable exercise of discretion. Though the term ¡°preliminary assessment¡± in ST/SGB/2019/8 was not specifically used in the contested decision, it was clear that Ms. Fosse¡¯s complaint was preliminarily assessed before the decision was made that no investigation would be undertaken. While the previous Bulletin (ST/SGB/2008/5) may have been in force when she lodged her complaint and when it was the subject of a preliminary...
2022-UNAT-1307, ASR AHMED TOSON
L'UNAT a rejet¨¦ l'appel interlocutoire comme non ¨¤ recevoir au motif que l'UNDT n'avait pas clairement d¨¦pass¨¦ sa comp¨¦tence ou sa juridiction ou a assum¨¦ une juridiction qu'elle n'avait pas lorsqu'elle a consolid¨¦ les affaires de M. Toson. L'UNAT a ¨¦galement convenu avec le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral que M. Toson avait avanc¨¦ des arguments infructueux similaires dans une affaire UNAT ant¨¦rieure qu'il a apport¨¦e, mais M. Toson a refus¨¦ d'¨ºtre guid¨¦ par ce jugement avant de poursuivre le pr¨¦sent appel. L'UNAT a mis M. Toson en avis qu'il risque qu'il en r¨¦sulte une attribution de co?ts pour des litiges...
2022-UNAT-1307, ASR AHMED TOSON
The UNAT dismissed the interlocutory appeal as not receivable on grounds that the UNDT had not clearly exceeded its competence or jurisdiction or assumed a jurisdiction it did not have when it consolidated Mr. Toson's cases. The UNAT also agreed with the Secretary-General that Mr. Toson had advanced similar unsuccessful arguments in an earlier UNAT case that he brought, but Mr. Toson refused to be guided by that judgment prior to pursuing the present appeal. The UNAT put Mr. Toson on notice that he risks incurring an award of costs for vexatious litigation if he persists in pursuing the same...
2022-UNAT-1282, Olexandr Maruschak
En ce qui concerne l'appel contre l'ordonnance de l'UNT pour la radiation des documents contest¨¦s de son dossier, Unat a constat¨¦ qu'il ¨¦tait ¨¤ recevoir parce que, ¨¤ moins que les documents ne soient conserv¨¦s pour ¨ºtre utilis¨¦s au proc¨¨s, ils pourraient ¨ºtre perdus avec la cons¨¦quence que le Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral serait Soyez incapable de les utiliser pour ¨¦tablir ses all¨¦gations de contrefa?on et de fraude comme il avait droit. Unat a constat¨¦ que l'ordre de l'UNDT ¨¦tait, ¨¤ cet ¨¦gard, effectivement irr¨¦m¨¦diable; que ce serait une cons¨¦quence manifestement d¨¦raisonnable de l'ordre pour le...
2022-UNAT-1282, Olexandr Maruschak
As to the appeal against the UNDT¡¯s Order for expungement of the impugned documents from its case file, UNAT found that it was receivable because, unless the documents were preserved for use at trial, they might be lost with the consequence that the Secretary-General would be unable to use them to establish his allegations of forgery and fraud as he was entitled to. UNAT found that the UNDT¡¯s Order was, in this respect, effectively irremediable; that this would be a manifestly unreasonable consequence of the Order for the Secretary-General; and that the circumstances were so rare and...
2022-UNAT-1269, Ashok Kumar Nigam
Unat a jug¨¦ que le jugement de l'UND n'¨¦tait pas coh¨¦rent dans la constatation de parties de la demande irr¨¦couvrables mais ne s'adressant pas ¨¤ ce qui allait arriver au solde de la r¨¦clamation qui ¨¦tait ¨¤ recevoir. Unat a soutenu que dans la mesure o¨´ l'ANDT a jug¨¦ que certaines des r¨¦clamations de l'appelant n'¨¦taient pas ¨¤ recevoir car ils n'¨¦taient pas d¨¦pos¨¦s dans les temps apr¨¨s l'¨¦valuation de la direction, UNT ne s'est pas tromp¨¦ en fait ou de la loi et a maintenu de telles conclusions. Unat a jug¨¦ qu'il y avait des erreurs de UNDT ¨¤ l'¨¦gard de laquelle l'appel devait ¨ºtre autoris¨¦...
2022-UNAT-1269, Ashok Kumar Nigam
UNAT held that the UNDT Judgment was inconsistent in finding parts of the application irreceivable but not addressing what was to happen to the balance of the claim which was receivable. UNAT held that to the extent that the UNDT held that some of the Appellant¡¯s claims were not receivable as they were not filed within time after management evaluation, UNDT did not err in fact or law and UNAT upheld such conclusions. UNAT held that there were errors by UNDT in respect of which the appeal had to be allowed, which were: (1) the UNDT decision not to receive the application in respect of claims...
2022-UNAT-1258, Yulia Andreeva
Unat a jug¨¦ qu'une analyse de l'e-mail et d'une autre correspondance entre le PNUD et l'appelant a indiqu¨¦ qu'elle n'aurait pas pu ¨ºtre amen¨¦e ¨¤ croire que sa demande de cong¨¦ pour janvier 2020 serait accord¨¦e. On lui avait inform¨¦ qu'un membre du personnel n'avait droit ¨¤ un cong¨¦ ¨¤ domicile que si le contrat du membre du personnel devait se poursuivre pendant plus de six mois apr¨¨s le rendement du cong¨¦, mais l'engagement continu de l'appelant avec le PNUD ¨¦tait inconnu, et sa date de fin de contrat actuelle ¨¦tait le 30 juin 2020. Unat a jug¨¦ que le PNUD s'¨¦tait conform¨¦ de ses obligations ¨¤...
2022-UNAT-1258, Yulia Andreeva
UNAT held that an analysis of the e-mail and other correspondence between UNDP and the Appellant indicated that she could not have been led to believe that her home leave request for January 2020 would be granted. She had been advised that a staff member was entitled to home leave only if the staff member¡¯s contract was anticipated to continue for more than six months after the return from home leave, yet Appellant¡¯s continuing engagement with UNDP was unknown, and her current contract end date was June 30, 2020. UNAT held that UNDP complied with its obligations to consider and decide the...
2022-UNAT-1243, Mohammed Faour
UNAT a not¨¦ que l'analyse de l'UNRWA DT sur la question de savoir si M. Faour avait demand¨¦ en temps opportun l'examen de la d¨¦cision de ne pas renouveler son contrat, l'UNRWA DT s'est concentr¨¦ sur la lettre omnibus de M. Faour (du 17 d¨¦cembre 2018) ¨¤ son sup¨¦rieur contenant de nombreuses plaintes, y compris une demande pour examen de son examen des performances, mais aucune demande d'examen de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e (la non-renouvellement de son contrat). Unat a cependant constat¨¦ que d'autres correspondances de M. Faour qui ¨¦taient dans les 60 jours statutaires pour demander un examen de la...
2022-UNAT-1243, Mohammed Faour
UNAT noted that UNRWA DT¡¯s analysis of whether Mr. Faour had timely requested review of the decision not to renew his contract, the UNRWA DT focused on Mr. Faour¡¯s omnibus letter (of 17 December 2018) to his superior containing many complaints, including a request for review of his performance review, but no request for review of the contested decision (the non-renewal of his contract). UNAT found, however, that other correspondence from Mr. Faour that was within the statutory 60 days to request a decision review did fulfill the minimum criteria required by UNAT judgments: it identified the...
2022-UNAT-1233, null Secretary-General
Le secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral a fait appel. UNAT a autoris¨¦ l'appel du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral et annul¨¦ le jugement de l'UNDT. Unat a jug¨¦ que la bonne fa?on de faire la comparaison pour s'assurer que l'augmentation minimale du salaire de base nette en vertu de la r¨¨gle 3.4 (b) est obtenue pour le membre du personnel est de comparer les deux r¨¦mun¨¦rations couch¨¦es de leurs ¨¦l¨¦ments COL et post-ajustement et de Mme et de Mme Les ¨¦valuations de Gonzalez Vasquez dans chacun. Unat a constat¨¦ que, bien que pas parfait en raison de la variabilit¨¦ potentielle des ¨¦valuations personnelles de Mme Gonzalez Vasquez...
2022-UNAT-1233, null Secretary-General
The Secretary-General appealed. UNAT allowed the Secretary-General¡¯s appeal and set aside the UNDT¡¯s Judgment. UNAT held that the correct way to make the comparison to ensure that the minimum increase in net base salary under Staff Rule 3.4(b) is achieved for the staff member is to compare both remunerations shorn of their COL and post adjustment elements and of Ms. Gonzalez Vasquez¡¯s assessments under each. UNAT found that although not perfect because of the potential variability of Ms. Gonzalez Vasquez¡¯s personal assessments under each, it achieves the required comparator using the GS net...
2022-UNAT-1221, Secretary-General
Unat a d'abord expliqu¨¦ que dans le cadre du nouveau r¨¦gime de remboursement, une d¨¦pense serait recouvrable si: (i) c'est pour les frais de scolarit¨¦; (ii) il est vers¨¦ directement ¨¤ l'¨¦cole; et (iii) il est certifi¨¦ par l'¨¦cole comme n¨¦cessaire pour la fr¨¦quentation. Unat a rejet¨¦ l'affirmation du membre du personnel selon laquelle une autre entit¨¦ de l'ONU appliquerait plus favorablement une r¨¨gle ¨¤ son cas, cette interpr¨¦tation de l'entit¨¦ devrait l'emporter sur celui donn¨¦ par l'organisation o¨´ il travaille r¨¦ellement. Deuxi¨¨mement, non d'accord avec l'approche de l'administration selon...
2022-UNAT-1221, Secretary-General
UNAT first explained that under the new reimbursement regime, an expense would be recoverable if: (i) it¡¯s for tuition; (ii) it is paid directly to the school; and (iii) it is certified by the school as being necessary for attendance. UNAT rejected the staff member¡¯s claim that because another UN entity would apply a rule more favorably to his case, that entity¡¯s interpretation should trump over the one given by the organization where he actually works. Second, UNAT disagreed with the Administration¡¯s approach that if an item in a category of fees was inadmissible, then the Administration...
2022-UNAT-1208, Hatim Sobier
Unat a d'abord expliqu¨¦ qu'il s'agit d'un cas o¨´ l'ANDT aurait d? tenir une audience pour d¨¦terminer les ¨¦tats d'esprit des personnes qui ont d¨¦cid¨¦ que le membre du personnel n'aurait pas d? ¨ºtre plac¨¦ sur la liste. Le Tribunal a d¨¦fini les biais comme suit: (par. 29 - 32) "29. Le biais est un ¨¦l¨¦ment de justice naturelle qui examine non seulement l'esprit du d¨¦cideur subjectivement, mais la manifestation du processus de prise de d¨¦cision examin¨¦ objectivement. Autrement dit, une d¨¦cision n'est pas seulement biais¨¦e si elle est prise par un fabricant de d¨¦cisions avec l'intention de favoriser...