2018-UNAT-827

2018-UNAT-827, Awe

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered an application for interpretation of judgment No. 2017-UNAT-774 filed by Mr Awe. The application was admitted in part. UNAT ordered the Secretary-General to send a corrected version of the meeting minutes and of the FFP’s findings to all the recipients of the 22 January 2014 meeting minutes. UNAT held that its judgment did not address the question of whether Mr Awe could request disciplinary actions against Ms Yasin, or whether he could claim compensation for procedural errors in case such actions have not been undertaken since these issues were the subject of Mr Awe’s separate application to UNDT, Case No. NBI/2017/060. UNAT held that judgment No. 2017-UNAT-774 finally settled Mr Awe’s claims for compensation for loss of reputation and professional standing about the 22 January 2014 meeting and its minutes including any actions and wrongdoings by Ms Yasin. UNAT held that the application on all remaining issues was inadmissible.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

UNAT judgment: The Applicant filed an application challenging the Administration’s decision with respect to Mr. Rutger’s abuse of authority and harassment and a second application challenging the Administration’s actions with respect to the Fact-Finding Panel’s (FFP) findings against Ms. Yasin and the failure to afford him an effective remedy. Regarding the second application, UNDT held that it was premature since no final administrative decision had been taken in relation to the complaint against Ms Yasin. Regarding the first application, UNDT held that the FFP had established that the Applicant’s allegations were well-founded and that the conduct in question amounted to possible misconduct. On the issue of compensation, UNDT held that the Applicant suffered damage to his reputation and professional standing exacerbated by the continuing and unacceptable delay in affording him the relief to which he was entitled. UNDT granted the Applicant compensation for the procedural error and the harm he suffered. The Secretary-General appealed. UNAT upheld the appeal in part and modified the UNDT judgment, insofar as it awarded compensation for procedural error and to reduce the compensation for harm.

Legal Principle(s)

Left deliberately blank.

Outcome

Revision, correction, interpretation or execution

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

Awe

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry :