¹ú²úAV

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. The Secretary-General raised the argument, inter alia, that Ms Lamb’s retroactive appointment was disrupted when she resigned and separated and, therefore, she had no contractual relationship with the Organisation obliging it to place her preferentially in vacant posts as someone holding a permanent appointment. UNAT held that UNDT concluded correctly that (1) Ms Lamb’s employment ended in mid-2013 by her own initiative and (2) there was nothing in the documentation relating to Ms Lamb’s resignation to support her assertion that it was precipitated by uncertainty about her longer-term prospects with UNAKRT. UNAT held that although, in 2017, Ms Lamb accepted permanent employment status, which included a deemed retroactivity to mid-2009, her status as a permanent member of staff was ended by her resignation in 2013. UNAT held that Ms Lamb was not entitled to any benefits except those to which a staff member on a permanent appointment would have been entitled on resigning with notice. UNAT held that the UNDT was incorrect in deciding that the 2017 agreement created a new contractual relationship that survived Ms Lamb’s resignation. UNAT held that the UNDT erred in law. UNAT upheld the appeal of the Secretary-General and vacated the UNDT judgment.