2012-Ģ��ƵAT-269

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵRWA DT was correct in applying Former Ģ��ƵRWA Area Staff Rule 106. 1. 16 to calculate the interest applicable to the Appellant��s pay-out and that Ģ��ƵRWA DT had not erred in this regard. Ģ��ƵAT held that the contention that the Administrative Rules of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund apply to the Appellant��s situation had no merit and had been raised for the first time on appeal. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that Ģ��ƵRWA DT had erred in finding that the Appellant��s terms and conditions of employment are governed solely and exclusively by the Agency��s Area Staff Regulations and Rules and other relevant issuances as amended by the Agency. Ģ��ƵAT concurred with Ģ��ƵRWA DT that the manner in which the Provident Fund Secretariat had calculated the Provident Fund balance of separating participants did not constitute an administrative decision alleging the non-observance of the Appellant��s terms of appointment and was, therefore, not within its jurisdiction. Ģ��ƵAT held that there was no appealable administrative decision. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵRWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to apply the November 2008 interest rate to the balance of her Provident Fund account and requested compensation for the difference between the December and November 2008 interest rates. Ģ��ƵRWA DT dismissed the application on the ground that there was no appealable administrative decision. Ģ��ƵRWA DT found that the manner in which the Provident Fund Secretariat calculated the balance of separating participants such as the Applicant��s did not constitute an administrative decision as defined by Ģ��ƵRWA Area Staff Regulation 11. 1 and did not fall within the scope of its jurisdiction as an administrative decision alleging the non-observance of the Applicant��s terms of appointment. Ģ��ƵRWA DT determined that the interest rate of 18. 49% was correctly applied. The Applicant appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

The manner in which the Provident Fund Secretariat calculates the account balance, essentially a pension settlement amount, for separating participants does not constitute an administrative decision and, therefore, does not fall within the jurisdiction of Ģ��ƵRWA DT and Ģ��ƵAT.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on receivability

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

Hamad

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement