2013-UNAT-319

2013-UNAT-319, Laeijendecker

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2011-UNAT-158. UNAT held that there was no new fact such as to meet the criteria set out in Article 11 of the UNAT Statute. UNAT held that Mr Laeijendecker sought to re-argue or reopen issues. UNAT held that insofar as Mr Laeijendecker sought interpretation of the impugned judgment, paragraphs 29, 30 and 31 were clear on their face and had to be read in conjunction with paragraphs 27 and 28, and paragraphs 32-35. On the allegation of bias, UNAT held that Mr Laeijendecker’s submissions amounted to no more than completely unsubstantiated allegations about the presiding Judge and a mischievous attempt to connect her former offices to issues he had with the International Court of Justice (ICJ). UNAT held that Mr Laeijendecker had not made out any case for revision. UNAT rejected the application for revision.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

In judgment No. 2011-UNAT-158, UNAT affirmed the decision rejecting Mr Laeijendecker’s request for a disability benefit on the grounds that he had failed to provide any explanation justifying exceptional circumstances preventing him from having submitted a request to the UN Staff Pension Committee in a timely manner.

Legal Principle(s)

An application seeking revision can, irrespective of the title, only succeed if it fulfils the strict and exceptional criteria set out in Article 11 of the UNAT Statute.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on receivability

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered; No relief ordered.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Laeijendecker

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry :