UNDT/2012/074

UNDT/2012/074, Wu

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Not only did Counsel for the Respondent initially refuse to take part in the proceedings because submissions were being filed and submitted through the eFiling portal, she further failed to comply with the Tribunal’s Order granting her an extension of 30 days. This failure, in the circumstances is an abuse of the process of the Tribunal. The Tribunal is entitled to enter, on its own Motion, a default judgment in this case. This means that in the present case, the Tribunal shall rely on the facts as presented by the Applicant and apply the relevant law to these facts. Upon his separation from service on retirement, the Applicant was entitled to payment of the non- removal of personal effects and the non removal element of the mobility and hardship allowance. The Applicant was not entitled to the payment of an additional 46 months of non-removal allowance in respect to his transfer from UNOG to UNON in April 2010. The Applicant is entitled to payment for charges incurred in the shipment of his personal effects and household goods.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, a former staff member of UNON, contests a decision taken on 10 June 2011 stating that he was ineligible for: payment of a non-removal allowance in lieu of removal costs in respect to his separation from service on retirement; payment of a non-removal allowance for the remaining 46 months in respect to his transfer from the United Nations Office at Geneva to UNON in April 2010; and entitlement to unaccompanied shipment in respect to his repatriation travel upon retirement as he took a ticket option.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

Outcome Extra Text

The Respondent is ordered to pay the Applicant for: the non-removal of personal effects and the non removal element of the mobility and hardship allowance; the charges, as conceded by the Respondent, incurred in the shipment of his personal effects, household goods and excess baggage.

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

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry :

Date of Judgement