2017-UNAT-739, Fayek
UNAT refused the Appellant’s motion for additional pleadings on the basis that exceptional circumstances were not demonstrated. UNAT held that, contrary to the Appellant’s reasoning, fact-finding panels do not fall in the category of technical bodies under Staff Rule 11. 2(b), nor has the Secretary-General designated fact-finding panels established under ST/SGB/2008/5 as technical bodies. UNAT upheld the UNDT’s finding that the request for management evaluation was a mandatory first step in the judicial process. UNAT held that the Appellant did not apply for management evaluation as required and, as a result, her application was not receivable. UNAT dismissed the appeal and upheld the UNDT judgment.
The Applicant contested the decision to close the case after an investigation of her complaint of prohibited conduct against two staff members and the decision not to grant her compensation. UNDT dismissed the application as not receivable as the Applicant had failed to request management evaluation of the contested decision.
Neither the UNAT Statute nor its rules provide for an appellant to file an additional pleading after the respondent has filed his answer. Fact-finding panels do not fall in the category of technical bodies under Staff Rule 11. 2(b).