UNDT/2011/182 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

UNDT/2011/182, Seddik Ben Omar

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Outcome: The Applicant’s claim relating to the non-renewal of contract was not receivable (time-barred) and his claim for reimbursement of salary was rejected for lack of evidence. The Respondent was ordered to remove the note from the Applicant’s file and pay the Applicant six months’ net base salary for the breach of due process rights and the effect of the note on his career.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant appealed three administrative decisions: non-renewal of his fixed-term contract; denial of salary payments while on sick leave; and the decision to place an adverse in his Official Status File (OSF).

Legal Principle(s)

Adverse note in file: The Note should be accurate and the staff member must be given a fair and genuine opportunity to comment on it. Failure to be given an opportunity to comment is a breach of due process rights. Rights of former employees: ST/AI/292 does not refer to former staff members, but it is a logical, fair and reasonable implication that the Organization should not be precluded from placing adverse material on the file of a former staff member. With this right and duty comes the responsibility for ensuring that the effected former staff is afforded the fundamental rights set out in ST/AI/292.

Outcome

Dismissed as not receivable

Outcome Extra Text

The Applicant’s claim relating to the non-renewal of contract was not receivable (time-barred) and his claim for reimbursement of salary was rejected for lack of evidence. The Respondent was ordered to remove the note from the Applicant’s file and pay the Applicant six months’ net base salary for the breach of due process rights and the effect of the note on his career.

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

Seddik Ben Omar

Entity

UN Secretariat

Case Number(s)

UNDT/NY/2010/057/UNAT/1576

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry Location :

New York