AV

UNDT/2018/053

UNDT/2018/053, Al Najadi

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal held that the application was not receivable ratione materiae. The Tribunal found that UNISFA’s decision of 17 April 2016 was of a general kind pursuant to the restructuring and was not a decision of individual application to the detriment of the Applicant. With regard to the Applicant’s claim that the contested decision was motivated by abuse of power, ill will directed against his own interests or any other improper motive, the Tribunal held that the the Applicant had provided no arguable case to support his position.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested UNISFA’s decision to transfer him from the Outstation Management Unit (OMU) to the Joint Logistics Operation Centre (JLOC).

Legal Principle(s)

a) According to staff regulation 1.2(c ), staff members are subject to the authority of the Secretary-General and to assignment by him or her to any of the activities or offices of the United Nations. b) Pursuant to the Tribunal’s jurisprudence: - the key characteristic of an administrative decision subject to judicial review is that the decision must “produce direct legal consequences” affecting a staff member’s terms and conditions of appointment the administrative decision must “have a direct impact” on the terms of appointment or contract of employment of the individual staff member. - an international organization necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts and the redeployment of staff. - the burden of proving discrimination or improper motivation rests with the party making the allegation.

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