¹ú²úAV

UNDT/2020/015

UNDT/2020/015, Mackie

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Having reviewed the motion, the Tribunal found that it raised a preliminary issue of jurisdiction which it addressed sua sponte and found the application not receivable ratione materiae. The application did not fall under any of the stipulated exceptions to obtaining a management evaluation as a first step to invoking the powers of the internal justice system.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant filed a motion for extension of time to file an application.

Legal Principle(s)

The Dispute Tribunal has the mandate under arts. 2.6 and 8.1(c) of its Statute and is required under the United Nations Appeals Tribunal’s (UNAT) jurisprudence to consider, sua sponte, in circumstances such as those reflected in this motion, whether or not it has jurisdiction or competence to review a staff member’s motion before it. Staff rule 11.2(b) sets out two conditions under which an applicant is exempted from requesting management evaluation. It should be read together with art. 8 of the UNDT Statute to determine whether the application is receivable by the UNDT. An application before the UNDT without a prior request for management evaluation can only be receivable if the contested administrative decision has been taken pursuant to advice from a technical body or if the administrative decision has been taken at Headquarters in New York to impose a disciplinary or non- disciplinary measure pursuant to Staff Rule 10.2 following the completion of a disciplinary process. In all other cases, where the request for management evaluation is a mandatory first step before coming to the internal justice system, this request shall provide the Administration with the opportunity to reassess the situation and correct possible mistakes or errors with efficiency.

Outcome
Dismissed as not receivable
Outcome Extra Text

The application was not receivable because the Applicant did not request for management evaluation.

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