2010-UNAT-005, Tadonki
UNAT considered the Secretary-General’s appeals against UNDT decisions ordering the suspension of the contested decisions beyond the deadline for management evaluation. UNAT clarified that, generally, only appeals against final judgments would be receivable, because otherwise, cases would seldom proceed if either party was dissatisfied with a procedural ruling. Article 2.2 of the UNDT Statute authorizes UNDT to order suspension of a contested decision only “during the pendency of the management evaluation”. UNAT found that UNDT exceeded its jurisdiction in ordering suspension of the contested decision not to renew the staff member’s contract beyond the deadline for management evaluation. UNDT also exceeded its jurisdiction under Article 10.2 of the UNDT Statute by ordering suspension of the contested decision not to renew the staff member’s contract pending the final determination of the case. UNAT emphasized that almost no preliminary matters would be receivable, for instance, matters of evidence, procedure, and trial conduct. UNAT held that only when it is clear that UNDT has exceeded its jurisdiction will a preliminary matter be receivable.
The staff member filed an application for suspension of action of the decision not to renew his contract. UNDT ordered that the contested decision be suspended pending the final determination of the substantive appeal and that the staff member’s salary be paid from the date of the order until the final determination of the case.
Generally, only appeals against final judgments are receivable. However, when it is clear that UNDT has exceeded its jurisdiction, a preliminary matter may be receivable. Under Article 2. 2 of the UNDT Statute, UNDT has the competence to order the suspension of that decision only during the pendency of the management evaluation.