51ÁÔÆæ

The UNAT noted that the decision to place Mr. Flekal on an OTI process is only an intermediate step in the performance management process and has had no direct impact or adverse consequence on his terms of appointment or the contract of employment and therefore is not an administrative decision subject to judicial review.

The UNAT found that Mr. Flekal was separated for medical reasons, declared incapacitated and awarded a disability pension. He was not separated from the Agency due to non-renewal of his fixed-term appointment. Therefore, Mr. Flekal¡¯s challenge of the 29 August 2023 decision...

The UNAT held that a party aggrieved by denial of interim relief can and generally must wait until the matter is finally resolved before filing an appeal.

The UNAT found that a decision regarding interim relief may be reviewable if it can be shown that the first instance tribunal, the JAB, exceeded its jurisdiction or competence.

The UNAT noted that the JAB is specifically empowered by the ISA Staff Rules to decide whether suspension of an administrative action is appropriate, which is within its competence and jurisdiction.

The UNAT found that there was no basis for its intervention in the...

L¡¯UNAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯UNDT avait commis une erreur en concluant que les faits ¨¦tablis ¨¤ l¡¯origine des all¨¦gations ne constituaient pas une faute professionnelle. Elle a jug¨¦ que la participation r¨¦guli¨¨re de l¡¯ancien membre du personnel ¨¤ des ¨¦changes portant sur le partage d¡¯informations non publiques, ainsi que ses communications avec M.R., une personne s¡¯exprimant publiquement sur des questions relatives au Bureau de gestion des investissements (OIM), constituaient une divulgation non autoris¨¦e ou, ¨¤ tout le moins, une participation ¨¤ un partage non autoris¨¦ d¡¯informations non publiques.

L...

The UNAT held that the UNDT erred in finding that the established facts underlying the allegations did not amount to misconduct. It found that the former staff member's sustained participation in exchanges concerning the sharing of non-public information and his communications with M.R., an individual engaging publicly on matters pertaining to the Office of Investment Management (OIM), constituted unauthorized disclosure or, at minimum, participation in unauthorized sharing of non-public information.

The UNAT held that the UNDT erred in characterizing as too vague the allegation that the...

L¡¯UNAT a estim¨¦ que les questions soulev¨¦es en appel portaient sur le point de savoir si l¡¯UNDT avait commis une erreur en
refusant d¡¯accorder l¡¯anonymat au membre du personnel dans le cadre d¡¯une proc¨¦dure contestant une r¨¦primande ¨¦crite, s¡¯il avait mal appliqu¨¦ la jurisprudence r¨¦gissant l¡¯anonymisation, et si une telle erreur justifiait un r¨¦examen interlocutoire. Elle a rappel¨¦ que les recours interlocutoires ne sont recevables que dans des circonstances rares et exceptionnelles, notamment lorsqu¡¯une erreur ne peut ¨ºtre corrig¨¦e par un jugement d¨¦finitif et qu¡¯il serait manifestement...

L¡¯UNAT a estim¨¦ que les questions soulev¨¦es en appel portaient sur le point de savoir si le Tribunal des litiges de l¡¯UNRWA avait commis une erreur en concluant que les faits de faute avaient ¨¦t¨¦ ¨¦tablis selon la norme de la preuve claire et convaincante, s¡¯il avait commis une erreur en concluant que le comportement constituait une faute grave, et s¡¯il avait commis une erreur en confirmant la proportionnalit¨¦ de la sanction disciplinaire consistant en la cessation de service sans indemnit¨¦ de licenciement. Il a rappel¨¦ que son r?le n¡¯¨¦tait pas de proc¨¦der ¨¤ un r¨¦examen de novo, mais de...

L¡¯UNAT a tout d¡¯abord estim¨¦ que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e du 17 avril 2011 ne constituait pas une d¨¦cision administrative susceptible de recours et n¡¯¨¦tait pas recevable ratione materiae, dans la mesure o¨´ elle se contentait de conseiller ¨¤ l¡¯ancien membre du personnel de se rendre au bureau du HCR le plus proche et d¡¯y demander l¡¯asile ou la r¨¦installation en tant que r¨¦fugi¨¦.

? titre subsidiaire, m¨ºme en supposant que le courriel du 17 avril 2011 ait pu constituer une d¨¦cision administrative valable et susceptible de recours, l¡¯UNAT a estim¨¦ que la demande de l¡¯ancien fonctionnaire resterait...

L¡¯UNAT a constat¨¦ que Mme George avait d¨¦pos¨¦ sa demande de retour au syst¨¨me de r¨¦mun¨¦ration en dollars am¨¦ricains le 4 ao?t 2015 et que l¡¯Administration l¡¯avait rejet¨¦e le 10 novembre 2015. Malgr¨¦ cette communication claire, l¡¯ancienne fonctionnaire a continu¨¦ ¨¤ ¨¦changer des courriers avec l¡¯Administration afin d¡¯obtenir un r¨¦examen de la d¨¦cision pendant pr¨¨s de neuf ans. Elle a attendu le 9 avril 2024 pour d¨¦poser sa demande de r¨¦examen aupr¨¨s du Comit¨¦ permanent. Comme celle-ci avait ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦pos¨¦e au-del¨¤ du d¨¦lai l¨¦gal de quatre-vingt-dix jours ¨¤ compter de la r¨¦ception de la notification...

L¡¯UNAT a estim¨¦ que l¡¯ancien agent avait form¨¦ son recours dans le d¨¦lai l¨¦gal. Elle a relev¨¦ que, puisqu¡¯il avait d¨¦pos¨¦ sa requ¨ºte devant le TNDU en fran?ais, le d¨¦lai de 60 jours pour former son recours courait ¨¤ compter de la date de r¨¦ception de l¡¯arr¨ºt du TNDU dans cette m¨ºme langue. Comme il avait re?u l¡¯arr¨ºt du TDN en fran?ais le 11 juillet 2025 et avait form¨¦ son pourvoi le 13 ao?t 2025, l¡¯UNAT a estim¨¦ que celui-ci avait ¨¦t¨¦ form¨¦ dans les d¨¦lais.

N¨¦anmoins, l¡¯UNAT a jug¨¦ que la requ¨ºte de l¡¯ancien fonctionnaire devant le TDN n¡¯¨¦tait pas recevable. ? cet ¨¦gard, l¡¯UNAT a tout d...

The UNAT held that the former staff member filed his appeal within the statutory deadline. It noted that since he filed his application before the UNDT in French, the 60-day time limit for filing his appeal ran from the date of receipt of the UNDT Judgment in that same language. As he received the UNDT Judgment in French on 11 July 2025 and filed his appeal on 13 August 2025, the UNAT held that it was filed in a timely manner.

Nevertheless, the UNAT found that the former staff member¡¯s application before the UNDT was not receivable. In this regard, the UNAT first rejected his contention...

The UNAT found that Ms. George submitted her request to revert to the US dollar track system on 4 August 2015 and the Administration rejected it on 10 November 2015.Despite that clear communication, the former staff member continued to exchange correspondence with the Administration seeking reconsideration of the decision for almost nine years.She waited until 9 April 2024 before submitting her request for review to the Standing Committee.As it was filed beyond the statutory time limit of ninety days of receipt of notification of the contested decision, the UNAT held that her request was...

The UNAT first held that the contested decision of 17 April 2011 did not constitute an appealable administrative decision and was not receivable ratione materiae, insofar as it merely advised the former staff member to go to the nearest UNHCR office and seek asylum or resettlement as a refugee.

Subsidiarily, even assuming that the e-mail of 17 April 2011 could have constituted a valid appealable administrative decision, the UNAT found that the former staff member¡¯s application would nonetheless remain not receivable on two grounds. First, he did not request management evaluation of the...

The UNAT held that the issues on appeal were whether the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal erred in finding that the facts of misconduct were established to the clear and convincing evidence standard, whether it erred in concluding that the conduct constituted serious misconduct, and whether it erred in affirming the proportionality of the disciplinary sanction of separation from service without termination indemnity. It recalled that its role is not to conduct a de novo review, but to determine whether the first?instance tribunal committed an error of law, fact, or procedure resulting in an unreasonable...

The UNAT held that the issues on appeal were whether the UNDT erred in refusing to grant anonymity to the staff member in proceedings challenging a written reprimand, whether it misapplied the jurisprudence governing anonymization, and whether such an error justified interlocutory review. It recalled that interlocutory appeals are receivable only in rare and exceptional circumstances, including where an error is irremediable by a final judgment and it would be manifestly unreasonable for the impugned order to remain in effect.

The UNAT found that the UNDT committed an error of law by...

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que l'ajustement proportionnel des normes de charge de travail pour les services d'auto-r¨¦vision relevait clairement du pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire de l'Administration. Le Tribunal d'appel s'est d¨¦clar¨¦ satisfait du fait que l'Administration avait suivi toutes les proc¨¦dures appropri¨¦es lors de la prise et de la mise en ?uvre de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e, et que le TND avait correctement d¨¦termin¨¦ qu'il n'¨¦tait pas n¨¦cessaire de consulter la direction du personnel au niveau du d¨¦partement ou du bureau concernant une d¨¦cision administrative sp¨¦cifique susceptible d'appel.

Le...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the proportional adjustment of workload standards for self-revision services was a matter that fell squarely within the Administration¡¯s discretionary authority. The Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Administration followed all proper procedures when taking and implementing the contested decision, and the UNDT properly determined that there was no requirement for staff management consultations at the departmental or office level in relation to a specific appealable administrative decision.

The Appeals Tribunal dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No...

L'UNAT a d'abord examin¨¦ la demande d'audience orale pr¨¦sent¨¦e par le fonctionnaire et a d¨¦cid¨¦ qu'elle n'¨¦tait pas n¨¦cessaire pour le r¨¨glement rapide et ¨¦quitable de son affaire.

L'UNAT a fait observer que lorsque les seules personnes pr¨¦sentes lors d'une agression physique sont l'auteur et la victime, une audience orale peut ¨ºtre utile pour ¨¦tablir la cr¨¦dibilit¨¦ des t¨¦moignages. Toutefois, dans le cas pr¨¦sent, le TCSN a not¨¦ que le fonctionnaire et son conseil avaient convenu qu'ils n'avaient aucun t¨¦moin ¨¤ pr¨¦senter lors d'une audience orale et pr¨¦f¨¦raient s'en remettre au rapport d...

Le Tribunal d'appel a estim¨¦ que l'ajustement proportionnel des normes de charge de travail pour les services d'auto-r¨¦vision relevait clairement du pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire de l'Administration. Le Tribunal d'appel s'est d¨¦clar¨¦ satisfait que l'Administration ait suivi toutes les proc¨¦dures appropri¨¦es lors de la prise et de la mise en ?uvre de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e, et que le TNDH ait correctement d¨¦termin¨¦ qu'il n'¨¦tait pas n¨¦cessaire de consulter la direction du personnel au niveau du d¨¦partement ou du bureau concernant une d¨¦cision administrative sp¨¦cifique susceptible d'appel.

Le Tribunal d...

The UNAT first considered the staff member¡¯s request for an oral hearing, and decided it was not necessary for the expeditious and fair disposal of his case.

The UNAT observed that when the only persons present in a physical assault are the perpetrator and the victim, an oral hearing may be useful for reaching credibility findings. However, in this case, the UNAT noted that the staff member and his counsel agreed that they had no witnesses to present at an oral hearing and preferred to rely on the investigation report. In these circumstances, the UNDT did not err in not holding an oral hearing...

The Appeals Tribunal found that the proportional adjustment of workload standards for self-revision services was a matter that fell squarely within the Administration¡¯s discretionary authority. The Appeals Tribunal was satisfied that the Administration followed all proper procedures when taking and implementing the contested decision, and the UNDT properly determined that there was no requirement for staff management consultations at the departmental or office level in relation to a specific appealable administrative decision.

The Appeals Tribunal dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No...