����AV

UNAT considered the Appellant’s appeal and noted that the letters of appointment issued to the Appellant for the period of 1 July 2009 through 30 June 2012 did not refer to either the Memorandum, that described the planned phasing-out of the PTA, or the PTA itself. UNAT also noted that the PTA is neither a benefit or entitlement under the Staff Regulations and Rules, which “embody the conditions of service and the basic rights and duties and obligations of United Nations staff members,” nor an “administrative issuance in application of, and consistent with, the said Regulations and Rules. ” UNAT found that since neither the Memorandum nor the PTA were incorporated into the Appellant’s terms and conditions of employment through the letters of appointment or the Staff Regulations and Rules, UNDT did not err in determining that discontinuance of the PTA did not breach the Appellant’s employment contract. UNAT held that there was no merit in the Appellant’s argument that she had a legitimate expectation to receive the PTA for the two contract years beginning 1 July 2011 and 1 July 2012. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.