2012-Ģ��ƵAT-254

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered the Secretary-General��s appeal. Ģ��ƵAT noted that Ģ��ƵDT did not find that the Applicant was distressed by Ģ��ƵHCR��s illegal conduct or that he had suffered any adverse consequences or harm from Ģ��ƵHCR��s procedural error in following the opinion of DSS. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT had exceeded its competence and made an error in law in awarding compensation to the staff member since he had not suffered pecuniary loss or distress and was not harmed by the illegal conduct. Ģ��ƵAT upheld the appeal and reversed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment regarding the award of damages to the staff member.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to retain his application for P-3 and P-4 Field Safety Adviser (FSA) posts. Ģ��ƵDT found that: 1) the Applicant��s appeal of Ģ��ƵHCR��s decision was receivable; 2) Ģ��ƵHCR had rejected the application solely because the Department of Safety and Security (DSS) had denied him clearance; 2) Ģ��ƵHCR was not compelled to follow DSS�� evaluation of the Applicant��s qualifications for candidacy for the pool of FSA posts, and it was a procedural irregularity for it to do so, but that it was highly unlikely that the Applicant would have been placed in the pool of candidates for FSA posts even if Ģ��ƵHCR��s procedure were regular due to the insufficiency of his managerial experience in the security field and his fluency only in French. Ģ��ƵDT awarded the Applicant compensation for the procedural irregularity.

Legal Principle(s)

Compensation may be awarded for actual pecuniary or economic loss, non-pecuniary damage, procedural violations, stress, and moral injury. Not every violation of a staff member��s legal rights or due process rights will necessarily lead to an award of compensation. Where the staff member does not show the procedural defect had any impact on him, his circumstances or his entitlements, and that he suffered no adverse consequences or harm from the procedural defect, compensation should not be awarded.

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

Nyakossi

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement