¹ú²úAV

UNAT considered the appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that the Secretary-General’s appeal was in direct conflict with his submissions to UNDT. While the Secretary-General acknowledged procedural irregularities by the Hiring Manager to UNDT, in his appeal he argued that no irregularities happened in removing the Applicant’s name from the list and that the Hiring Manager was entitled to exercise her discretion and correct her mistakes after further assessing the candidate’s qualifications. UNAT held that no evidence was presented to UNDT of a second assessment by the Hiring Manager or that a mistake was being corrected. UNAT found no error in the UNDT’s finding that the removal of the Applicant’s name from the list without further examining the qualifications was a procedural irregularity, as conceded by the Secretary-General in the UNDT hearing. UNAT held that it is not admissible for the Secretary-General to introduce new grounds of appeal which were not part of his case before the UNDT and that the submissions contesting the compensation awarded to the Applicant were entirely without merit. UNAT held that the Secretary-General, in presenting on appeal factual and legal arguments which directly contradicted his submissions to UNDT, had manifestly abused the appeals process. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.