UNDT/2012/208, Egglesfield
The UNDT found that the contested decision was based on improperly imposed conditions not stipulated under staff rule 4.18 and thus lacked proper legal basis. Further, it was arbitrary and manifestly unreasonable. Therefore, the contested decision was unlawful. The UNDT found that, had the discretion been properly exercised on the stipulated conditions, the Applicant would have been reinstated in service and shall be treated as such. The UNDT ordered rescission of the contested decision. The UNDT ordered that the Applicant be deemed as reinstated in service and that proper adjustments be made to his entitlements and benefits in line with the judgment and staff rule 4.18.
The Applicant contested the Respondent’s refusal to reinstate him to service following his separation from the United Nations Mission in Côte d’Ivoire (“UNOCI”) and his re-appointment to the United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Tribunals (“UNAKRT”).
Purpose of reinstatement under staff rule 4.18: The purpose of staff rule 4.18 is to confer continuity of employment on former staff members with fixed-term or continuing appointments who have been re-employed, and who may then be reinstated under staff rule 4.18, on the same type of contract within 12 months of their separation. Conditions for reinstatement under staff rule 4.18: A plain reading of staff rule 4.18 is that the only stipulated qualifying criteria for a staff member’s reinstatement is that he should have held a fixed-term or continuing appointment, and that he was re-employed under a fixed-term or a continuing appointment within twelve months of his separation. No further conditions for reinstatement have been established by the Secretary-General under staff rule 4.18.
Only specific performance (including rescission with in lieu compensation)