2022-UNAT-1275, Hussam Abd AlRhman Al Dirawi
The UNAT held that the supposedly unknown facts that Mr. Al Dirawi detailed in his application for revision of the UNAT Judgment focus on findings and conclusions in the UNAT Judgment with which he disagrees. Notably, these matters were considered in the original appeal and Mr. Al Dirawi basically submits a second appeal for a reassessment of the facts in his case, a remedy which is not available to the parties once the Appeals Tribunal has issued a final judgment. The UNAT thus held that Mr. Al Dirawi's application was not receivable.
Mr. Al Dirawi submitted an application for revision of Judgment No. 2021-UNAT-1158, in which the UNAT affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment that upheld his dismissal for serious misconduct.
Any application which seeks a review of a final judgment rendered by the Appeals Tribunal can only succeed if it fulfils the strict and exceptional criteria established by Article 11 of the Statute of the Appeals Tribunal.
Pursuant to Article 11, an applicant must show or identify the decisive facts that at the time of the Appeals Tribunal’s judgment were unknown to both the Appeals Tribunal and the party applying for revision; that such ignorance was not due to the negligence of the applicant; that the facts identified would have been decisive in reaching the decision; and that the decisive facts existed at the time when the judgment was given and were discovered subsequently.
An application for revision of a judgment which does not meet the statutory prerequisites, cannot be a collateral means of attack on the judgment or allowed to be a second right of final appeal.
Application for revision of judgment is dismissed.