UNDT/2012/180, Balinge
The Applicant’s post was one of 45 posts earmarked in November 2007 for abolition by December 2008. It is not contested that the 45 posts for abolition which included the Applicant’s post were extended on GTA funding through June 2011. In the present Application on the merits, the Applicant needs to prove, at least on the balance of probabilities, that the Retention Panel was unfair in its evaluation of him and was discriminatory. Not only did he fail in his earlier suspension of action application to give particulars of the irregularities, errors, omissions and favoritism which he alleged made the decision not to renew his fixed-term contract unlawful, he has not tendered additional evidence in this present Application. There is absolutely no showing of any unlawfulness on the part of the Respondent beyond the mere assertions and allegations of the Applicant.
The Applicant contested the decision to separate him from the Organisation.
N/A