AV

UNDT/2017/077

UNDT/2017/077, Buckley

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal found that several of the Applicant’s claims were not receivable, granted his claim for assignment grant in part, and rejected his claims for security evacuation allowance; post adjustment; and compensation for financial hardship.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, a Chief Supply Chain Management at the D-1 level, step 2, with the United Nations Organization Multidimensional Stabilization Mission in the Central Africa (“MINUSCA”), contests, inter alia, the Administration’s decision “not to recognize, implement and pay entitlements, following the evacuation of staff and the abandonment of Camp Faouar (Almet Al Faouar), Syria (the Headquarters of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, [“UNDOF”]) on 15 September 2015”.

Legal Principle(s)

UNDT not review the management evaluation response but the underlying decision: The outcome of the management evaluation review, its considerations and/or the staff member’s interpretations, views or critics in relation to it are not administrative decisions subject to legal review by the Dispute Tribunal.Security evacuation allowance: A security evacuation allowance, pursuant to the SPM in Chapter VI, sec. A, para. 8, is only to paid to staff members who are evacuated and not to those who are relocated.Assignment grant, on a prorated basis: An assignment grant consists of two elements: a daily subsistence allowance (“DSA”) and a lump-sum portion. A staff member is entitled to receive lump-sum portion even if his or her assignment is less than one year to this duty station on a prorated basis in accordance with sec. 6.2 of of ST/AI/2012/1Post adjustment: If relocated, a staff member is not entitled to more in post adjustment than the highest rate of the two duty stations.

Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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
Buckley
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry :
Date of Judgement
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type