����AV

As per the account of both parties, previously awarded costs had been paid and, thus, what remained to be considered is if the 2014 contested decision has been fully rescinded or not. The issues at stake are of a medical nature and that is why this Tribunal remanded the matter by Order No. 24 (GVA/2016) so that a Medical Board is convened and a determination on the Applicant’s sick leave entitlements is made. This medical determination is a condition sine qua non for the submission for consideration for a disability benefit by the UNSPC. Contrary to what the Applicant argues, UNJSPF administrative rule H.4(a) does not apply in her case. This rule provides that a UNJSPF participant can directly request the UNSPC for a determination about the granting of a disability benefit, under article 33(a) of the UNJSPF Regulations, if “the organization has not acted in accordance with [administrative] rule H.3”. There is an established procedure to determine whether a UNJSPF participant is incapacitated within the meaning of art. 33(a) of the UNJSPF Regulations. If an employing organization refuses to follow such a procedure, a staff member could invoke administrative rule H.4 and address the UNSPC directly. This is not the Applicant’s case. The existence of disagreements does not amount to a failure to act in accordance with administrative rule H.3.The Tribunal found that its decision in Bezziccheri had been fully executed and, consequently, that the application was moot.