UNDT/2010/091, Islam
UNDT found that the restructuring and the creation of the new post were undertaken in good faith and the decisions to abolish the applicant’s post and to end his contract were proper. UNDT also found that the applicant was told about the new post and invited to apply. As to the failure to complete the work plan and performance evaluation reports, this was irrelevant because it was not the reason for the non-renewal of the applicant’s contract, and, in any case, was due to the applicant himself. Outcome: The application was dismissed.
The applicant, a former staff member of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI), contests the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment. He had been informed that as a result of restructuring initiated in UNAMI his post was no longer required and would be abolished. The applicant submitted that this explanation was not true and that his contract was not renewed because of alleged performance shortcomings and disagreement with his supervisors over formulation of a work plan (needed for performance appraisal). As evidence of the ill will of senior officials, he claimed that he was not told that he could apply for the new post created when his post was abolished.
Reasons for non-renewal: If a decision-maker has several valid reasons not to renew a staff member’s contract, each being sufficient to justify the decision and complying with all necessary requirements, the decision-maker can choose to rely on any of those reasons in making the decision. Not identifying all reasons in such circumstances would not necessarily result in the unlawfulness of the decision. To prove the unlawfulness, the evidence would need to demonstrate that the unstated reasons were mistaken or irrelevant and significantly influenced the decision.