AV

UNDT/2017/056, Ngoga

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal found that the Applicant’s claim in respect of recoveries from his pension, affirmed by the Management Evaluation Unit on 14 April 2015 was not receivable. The Tribunal held that the Applicant had until 13 July 2015 to file an application challenging the decision but he failed to do so. With regard to the Applicant’s request for retroactive dependency benefits of his adopted children, the Tribunal held that the Applicant was required to request management evaluation of that decision within 60 calendar days, but he did not do so. Consequently, the application was rejected as it was not receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested two decisions: a)The decision to recover money overpaid to him by deducting funds from his pension and b)The UNMISS decision declining the Applicant’s claim of the benefits on behalf of his adopted children.

Legal Principle(s)

a) Pursuant to staff rule 11.2 (a), a staff member wishing to formally contest an administrative decision alleging non-compliance with his or her contract of employment or terms of appointment shall, as a first step, submit to the SecretaryGeneral in writing a request for a management evaluation of the administrative decision; b) A request for a management evaluation shall not be receivable unless it is sent within 60 calendar days from the date on which the staff member received notification of the administrative decision to be contested; c)Deadline for seeking management evaluation, may, pursuant to staff rule 11.2(c ), be extended by the decision of the Secretary-General and “under conditions specified by the Secretary-General”.

Outcome
Dismissed as not receivable

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.

Applicants/ Appellants
Ngoga
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type