The only issue in contention in this appeal is whether the UNDT erred on a question of law or fact when it found that the harm to the Appellant was sufficiently evidenced to justify an award of compensation for moral damages. UNAT found that UNDT based the award of compensation for harm both on the evidence produced by the individual and what it described as “pre-existing distress that the individual was already suffering from†which “was exacerbated by the unlawful decision to refuse his request†to investigate the allegations of discrimination. UNDT was to determine whether Mr. Kebede...