¹ú²úAV

The Appellant did not raise any challenges as to the merits of the UNRWA DT judgment, but rather his appeal related to the procedure adopted by UNRWA DT in hearing his complaint. UNAT held that it was not persuaded that UNRWA DT erred in procedure or otherwise exceeded its jurisdiction in the exercise of its power, such as to warrant reversal of the judgment. Noting that two Orders clarified the aim of the hearing, UNAT held that there was no prejudice caused to the Appellant by the failure to provide him with a description of the relevance of the witnesses’ testimony. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err in procedure in ordering the Respondent to file documents after the hearing. UNAT held that there were no grounds warranting the reversal of the UNRWA DT judgment. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment.