2026-UNAT-1639

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Appeals Tribunal found that Ms. Prodanovic had met the criteria for a continuing appointment and that under the applicable legal framework, the award of a continuing appointment was not subject to the Secretary-General's discretion. The UNDT therefore correctly held that the decision not to grant her a continuing appointment was unlawful.

The Appeals Tribunal however found that the granting of a continuing appointment was not an "appointment" for the purpose of Article 10(5)(a) of the UNDT Statute, and that the UNDT had erred in awarding in-lieu compensation.

The Appeals Tribunal reversed the award of in-lieu compensation; it otherwise affirmed the UNDT Judgment and dismissed the appeal.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The UNDT granted Ms. Prodanovic's application challenging the decision not to grant her a continuing appointment. The UNDT found that a proper application of the legal framework would have entitled Ms. Prodanovic to a continuing appointment. It therefore rescinded the decision and ordered that she should be granted a continuing appointment; and awarded in-lieu compensation in the amount of two years' net base salary.

The Secretary-General appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

With a few rare exceptions, appellants are not permitted to introduce new issues or evidence on appeal to the UNAT. The Appeals Tribunal��s function is to review the correctness of the judgment of the first instance tribunal and parties are expected to present their best cases at that first instance.

Conversion to a continuing appointment is an automatic right of a staff member who meets the criteria for consideration. Continuing appointments are not subject to the Secretary-General��s discretion.

The granting of a continuing appointment does not fall under "appointment" for the purpose of Article 10(5)(a) of the UNDT Statute. The recission of a decision denying a continuing appointment does therefore not require an award of in-lieu compensation under Article 10(5)(a).

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

The appeal is dismissed. The Appeals Tribunal sets aside the Dispute Tribunal��s award of in-lieu compensation made under Article 10(5)(a) of the Dispute Tribunal Statute and otherwise affirms Judgment No. UNDT/2025/031.

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants

Marina Skuric Prodanovic

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement