AV

2021-UNAT-1143

2021-UNAT-1143, Edward E. Hammond

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNDT did not err in determining that the 11 November 2018 letter provided notification of the final administrative decision subject to appeal, since it contained the key characteristic of producing “’direct legal consequences’ affecting a staff member’s terms and conditions of appointment”.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

UNDT/2020/098, in which UNDT rejected Mr. Hammond’s application contesting the non-renewal of his contract on grounds of receivability.

Legal Principle(s)

A determination of the date of receipt of notification for purposes of Staff Rule 11.2(c ) depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. The decisive moment of notification is when “all relevant facts … were known, or should have reasonably been known”. Further, “[t]he date of an administrative decision is based objective elements that both parties (Administration and staff member) can accurately determine”. The precise determination of the date of notification is crucial, and beneficial, for both the Organization and staff members. This is why, as a general rule, written notification most effectively satisfies the commitment to clarity and transparency, which are priority interests and ongoing concerns of the Organization. Neither the Dispute Tribunal nor the Appeals Tribunal has jurisdiction to waive the deadlines for the filing of requests for management evaluation or to grant any exceptions to it as it is a mandatory requirement pursuant to the Staff Rules. A party cannot introduce new claims for the first time on appeal, on pain of infringement of the two-tier principle of administration of justice.

Outcome
Appeal dismissed on merits

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Edward E. Hammond
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry :
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type
Document Topic/Theme :