2013-Ģ��ƵAT-294

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that there was no error in Ģ��ƵDT��s finding that the application was moot and thus, not receivable. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Ģ��ƵDT��s decision to dispose of the issue of compensation as part of another case was a case management decision well within the discretion of Ģ��ƵDT and caused no injustice to the Appellant. Ģ��ƵAT observed that it should never have been called on to review the Ģ��ƵDT��s decision since the fact that the application was moot was obvious. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant had manifestly abused the appeals process by filing an appeal that was blatantly frivolous. Ģ��ƵAT opined that the Appellant was fortĢ��ƵATe that on this occasion the Secretary-General had not made an application for costs and that, should the Appellant ever bring an appeal with such lack of merit again, he should be prepared to face an award of costs. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant had not established that Ģ��ƵDT fell into any error. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision of the Ethics Office not to respond to his complaint of retaliation. Ģ��ƵDT found that the matter had been rendered moot by the Ethics Office��s subsequent review and determination, and rejected the application. Ģ��ƵDT rejected the Applicant��s request to join the case with another of his cases, finding that to do so would not be appropriate for the fair and expeditious disposal of the other case.

Legal Principle(s)

Ģ��ƵAT will not lightly interfere with the broad discretion of Ģ��ƵDT in the management of cases.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

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

Gehr

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement