2015-UNAT-521 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2015-UNAT-521, Amany

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

On the Appellant’s argument that his non-renewal was a disguised disciplinary measure and that thus, management evaluation was not required, UNAT held that the argument had no merit and that the Appellant could not evade the statutory obligation of management evaluation by characterising the dispute decision as a disciplinary matter. UNAT held that UNDT properly considered the facts and the applicable statutory law and jurisprudence in arriving at its decision that the Appellant’s application was not receivable. UNAT held that, having failed to demonstrate that UNDT committed any error of law of fact, the Appellant’s appeal must fail. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his contract. UNDT found that the application was not receivable on the grounds that he had failed to request management evaluation prior to filing his application with UNDT and had requested management evaluation one month after the statutory deadline.

Legal Principle(s)

Requesting management evaluation is a mandatory first step in the appeal process. It is the staff member’s responsibility to ensure he or she is aware of the applicable procedure in the context of the administration of justice at the UN; ignorance cannot be invoked as an excuse.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

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

Amany

Entity

UNICEF

Case Number(s)

2014-598

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York