UNDT/2009/094

UNDT/2009/094, Bernard

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

In accordance with former staff rule 104.12(b)(i) and provisional staff rule 4.13(c), the Applicant cannot claim a right to the renewal of her fixed-term appointment. The Applicant claims that the difficult working relationship she had with her supervisor led the latter, with the objective of getting rid of the former, to seek the reclassification of her post at a higher level. However, the Applicant does not prove that the non-extension of her appointment results solely from the desire of her supervisor to remove her from the service, nor that, consequently, the contested decision appears prima facie to be unlawful. To order the suspension of an administrative decision, it is necessary that the three conditions provided for under article 2, paragraph 2, of the Tribunal’s statute be fulfilled. Given that one of the conditions is not fulfilled – i.e. the contested decision does not appear prima facie to be unlawful – the Tribunal must reject the application without its being necessary to examine whether the other two conditions – urgency and irreparable damage - are fulfilled

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant’s post was reclassified at a higher level and since she was not selected for another position within UNHCR, her fixed-term appointment will not be extended beyond its expiry date of 31 December 2009. The Applicant requests the Tribunal to suspend the implementation of the decision not to extend her fixed-term appointment.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

The application to suspend the implementation of the contested decision until the management evaluation has been completed is rejected.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Bernard

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry :