¹ú²úAV

2024-UNAT-1424

2024-UNAT-1424, Amal Ali El Khaled

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNAT noted that in light of multiple competing requests for lateral transfer, the staff member had not been one of the candidates who was recommended and selected for the position because her responsibilities had been different from the duties of the requested position, and the Agency sought candidates more familiar with those duties.

The UNAT held that under the relevant legal provisions governing lateral transfers, read together and not in isolation, the Agency had been authorized to base its assessment on the candidates’ suitability for the post instead of seniority, compelling reasons, and performance evaluation.

The UNAT considered that exercising discretion to hire persons whose duties were similar to the requirements of the role and who were more familiar with the duties of the position was not illegal, unfair or unreasonable. The UNAT agreed with the UNRWA DT’s finding that preferring candidates with prior experience in the exact role in this case had not been so unreasonable as to constitute abuse of discretion.

The UNAT found that the Agency had complied with the mandatory procedural requirements.

The UNAT held that the staff member’s assertion that the Agency should have been aware of her medical diagnosis because her doctor was also a staff member was misplaced as contrary to patient confidentiality.

The UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT’s Judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

A staff member contested the decision not to accede to her request for a lateral transfer to the post of Finance Assistant at UNRWA.

In Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2022/055, the UNRWA DT dismissed the application as without merit.

The staff member appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

The general principle is that posts are filled through a competitive selection process.

The proper role of the Dispute Tribunal in conducting a judicial review of an administrative decision is limited to examining its legality, rationality, compliance with procedure, and proportionality, and not to engage in a merit-based review.

The Dispute Tribunal will not lightly interfere with the exercise of managerial discretion in matters such as staff transfer.

Seniority is not the lone selection criterion in making the determination on the lateral transfer within UNRWA.

Considerations of the Administration may include those not explicitly listed in the governing issuance, provided that the considerations are rationally connected to the power of the Secretary-General to secure the highest standards of efficiency, competence and integrity in making appointments.

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.