2017-UNAT-719, Saeed
UNAT considered a request for revision of judgment. UNAT held that Mr Saeed had not presented any new and decisive fact and that therefore his application was without merit. UNAT dismissed the application for revision.
Previous UNAT judgment: Mr Saeed contested the decision to approve a new workflow in a division. In judgment No. 2016-UNAT-617, UNAT dismissed the appeal in its entirety, stating that Mr Saeed had not based his appeal on any grounds for appeal set forth in the UNAT Statute. With regard to the approval of the new workflow, UNAT held that even if it were to be considered a decision subject to appeal, the request for decision review was submitted after the expiry of the deadline as correctly pointed out by UNRWA DT.
The procedure of a revision of judgment is corrective in nature and not an opportunity for an applicant to reargue his case.