2010-Ģ��ƵAT-005

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered the Secretary-General��s appeals against Ģ��ƵDT decisions ordering the suspension of the contested decisions beyond the deadline for management evaluation. Ģ��ƵAT clarified that, generally, only appeals against final judgments would be receivable, because otherwise, cases would seldom proceed if either party was dissatisfied with a procedural ruling. Article 2.2 of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute authorizes Ģ��ƵDT to order suspension of a contested decision only ��during the pendency of the management evaluation��. Ģ��ƵAT found that Ģ��ƵDT exceeded its jurisdiction in ordering suspension of the contested decision not to renew the staff member��s contract beyond the deadline for management evaluation. Ģ��ƵDT also exceeded its jurisdiction under Article 10.2 of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute by ordering suspension of the contested decision not to renew the staff member��s contract pending the final determination of the case. Ģ��ƵAT emphasized that almost no preliminary matters would be receivable, for instance, matters of evidence, procedure, and trial conduct. Ģ��ƵAT held that only when it is clear that Ģ��ƵDT has exceeded its jurisdiction will a preliminary matter be receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The staff member filed an application for suspension of action of the decision not to renew his contract. Ģ��ƵDT ordered that the contested decision be suspended pending the final determination of the substantive appeal and that the staff member��s salary be paid from the date of the order until the final determination of the case.

Legal Principle(s)

Generally, only appeals against final judgments are receivable. However, when it is clear that Ģ��ƵDT has exceeded its jurisdiction, a preliminary matter may be receivable. Under Article 2. 2 of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute, Ģ��ƵDT has the competence to order the suspension of that decision only during the pendency of the management evaluation.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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 Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT 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

Tadonki

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement