¹ú²úAV

UNAT considered appeals by both Mr Said, limited to the amount of damages awarded, and by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that UNDT made several errors of law when it found UNICEF’s decision not to renew Mr Said’s contract for poor performance was not supported by his Performance Evaluation Report (PER) and was unlawful. UNAT held that UNDT did not accord any deference to UNICEF’s conclusion that Mr Said’s performance was poor and, instead, UNDT placed itself in the role of the decision-maker and determined whether it would have renewed the contract, based on the PER. UNAT held that UNDT made an error of law when it set its own standard for the poor performance required to support a non-renewal decision. UNAT held that UNDT made an error of law in finding that UNICEF had ignored all elementary rules of fairness in regard to performance and improvement. UNAT held that UNDT exceeded its competence in reaching issues not raised by Mr Said. UNAT held that UNDT made errors of law when it concluded that the UNICEF’s decision not to renew Mr Said’s appointment due to his poor performance was not supported by his PER and was unlawful. UNAT granted the Secretary-General’s appeal, dismissed Mr Said’s appeal and vacated the UNDT judgment.