¹ú²úAV

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT allowed the appeal on the grounds that UNDT erred in reaching the merits of the present case in circumstances where it had confirmed by Order that it would only address receivability as a preliminary issue. UNAT held that it disagreed with UNDT on the matter of receivability and that there was no administrative decision capable of being appealed before UNDT. UNAT held that the administrative decision Mr Saffir impugned did not deprive him of his work or affect his function; it was limited to announcing recruitment round to fill three of the 19 positions considered necessary for a restructuring exercise. UNAT held that, in the absence of any direct impact or negative consequences for Mr Saffir or his terms of appointment, it was not appealable by him. UNAT held that, as the Administration had rescinded the impugned decision, this rendered the claim before UNDT moot. UNAT held that it was legally impermissible for UNDT to rule on the merits of the matter and award compensation since, firstly, UNDT lacked jurisdiction and secondly, even if it were an administrative decision, UNDT had determined that the receivability issue would be addressed as a preliminary matter without going into the merits. UNAT allowed the appeal and vacated the UNDT judgment.