¹ú²úAV

2014-UNAT-461

2014-UNAT-461, Al-Badri

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Secretary-General appealed UNDT’s decision to admit to judicial review Ms Al-Badri's challenge against the decision to abolish her post in Amman and to create a new post at the same level in Baghdad. UNAT only considered the receivability of this appeal. UNAT held that alleged excess of jurisdiction or competence on the part of UNDT, so as to admit an appeal of an interlocutory order or judgment, must be clear or manifest. UNAT recalled its jurisprudence that the general principle underlying the right of appeal set out in Article 2(1) of the UNAT Statute is that only final judgments of UNDT are appealable and that only when it is clear that the UNDT has exceeded its jurisdiction will a preliminary matter be receivable. UNAT held that the alleged lack of jurisdiction or competence on the part of the UNDT, given the particular circumstances of the case, was not clearly established. UNAT held that the Secretary-General’s specific argument should be considered once a final judgment had been rendered if the Secretary-General chose to appeal further. UNAT dismissed the appeal on the basis that it was not receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Ms Al-Badri contested the sudden verbal decision to relocate her post from Amman to Baghdad without any notice, the subsequent abolition of her post in Amman, and the rejection of her request to postpone her entry on duty (EOD) date for a post in Baghdad to the end of March 2011. UNDT found that UNDP was estopped from asserting that Ms Al-Badri’s challenge of the decision to abolish her post in Amman and to create a new post in Baghdad was time-barred. UNDT also found that Ms Al-Badri’s claim against UNDP for refusing to postpone her EOD in Baghdad to the end of March 2011 was not receivable, as she did not raise the issue in her March 2011 request for management evaluation, nor did she make any submissions in this regard in her filing with UNDT dated June 2013.

Legal Principle(s)

The general principle underlying the right of appeal set out in Article 2(1) of the UNAT Statute is that only final judgments of the UNDT are appealable. Only when it is clear that the UNDT has exceeded its jurisdiction will a preliminary matter be receivable. Alleged excess of jurisdiction or competence on the part of the UNDT, so as to admit an appeal of an interlocutory order or judgment must be clear or manifest.

Outcome
Appeal dismissed on receivability

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Al-Badri
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry :
Date of Judgement
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type