UNAT considered whether UNRWA DT erred on a question of law and fact and whether its decision to dismiss the Appellant鈥檚 application was flawed by procedural irregularities. UNAT held that the Appellant failed to identify the apparent error of fact in the judgment and the basis for contending that an error was made, merely repeating arguments that did not succeed before UNRWA DT. The Appellant鈥檚 decision to sign the contract was binding on him as there was no evidence of duress. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed UNRWA DT鈥檚 judgment.