UNDT/2011/153, Chattopadhyay
It was not disputed by the Applicant that what he contested was not a decision which was actually made. Rather, he challenged a possible decision (to require him to take a break in service) which would most likely be made by the United Nations Office at Geneva. The Tribunal considered that no decision had been made at the time when the Applicant filed his application. Consequently, the application was found irreceivable.
The Applicant requested the Tribunal to suspend, during the pendency of the management evaluation, the implementation of the decision to require him to take a 31-day break in service after the expiration of his fixed-term appointment and prior to his reappointment on a temporary contract.
In accordance with article 2.2 of its Statute, the Tribunal may suspend, during the pendency of the management evaluation, the implementation of a contested administrative decision where the decision appears to be prima facie unlawful, the matter is of particular urgency and the Applicant would suffer irreparable damage if the decision in question is not suspended.