UNDT/2019/112

UNDT/2019/112, Clarke

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Applicant’s claim for damages based upon an allegation that his property was destroyed and that his private safety deposit box containing USD21,000 in cash was lost was found irreceivable. The Applicant did not include this claim in his application. The Tribunal found the application to be irreceivable regarding the claim for reimbursement of the cost of security services from November 2014 till May 2015. That claim did not expressly form part of the application or the management evaluation request. The claim for damages equalling USD150,000 for “subsistence while stranded in Uganda awaiting processing” was rejected. The Tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay the Applicant: his salary for the period 13- 21 May 2015 DSA applicable for Entebbe for the period 19-21 May 2015 and relocation grant of USD10,000. By way of compensation for the delay in effecting the payment of the final salary, the Respondent was ordered to pay the Applicant interest at the level of prime US rate on the amount of USD20,477.54 for the period from 1 October 2015 until 15 February 2016. All other claims were dismissed as either being irreceivable or unfounded. Related

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the MONUSCO Administration’s failure to “effect separation from service with full entitlements, shipment of personal effects and transport back to home country delays in processing final pay including Daily Subsistence Allowance (DSA) for his required stay in Uganda and in forwarding separation documents to the Pension Fund”.

Legal Principle(s)

For a breach or infringement to give rise to moral damages, especially in a contractual setting, where normally a pecuniary satisfaction for a patrimonial injury is regarded as sufficient to compensate a complainant for actual loss as well as the vexation or inconvenience caused by the breach, then, either the contract or the infringing conduct must be attended by peculiar features, or must occur in a context of peculiar circumstances. For proof of moral damage, an applicant’s testimony alone does not suffice and corroborating evidence is necessary.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Clarke

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry :