2013-Ģ��ƵAT-349

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT agreed with Ģ��ƵDT and its conclusion that the application was not receivable ratione materiae. Ģ��ƵAT noted that a request for management evaluation must be submitted prior to bringing an application before Ģ��ƵDT. Ģ��ƵAT further noted that, even if the Management Evaluation Unit (MEU) had failed to resolve the Appellant��s complaints about the contested decision, she still had the opportunity to file a timely application with Ģ��ƵDT for judicial review after she receive the response from the MEU but had chosen not to do so. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT exceeded its competence and jurisdiction in addressing the merits of the claim. Ģ��ƵAT held that because the Ģ��ƵDT had no competence and jurisdiction to make any factual findings and reach any legal conclusions on the merits of the Appellant��s claims, the correctness of such improper findings and conclusions could not be the basis of an appeal. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in denying the Appellant��s request for confidentiality and that her other claims on appeal had no merit, therefore it did not need to address them. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Ģ��ƵDT judgment: The Applicant contested a decision by the Ethics Office not to consider that the settlement agreement she had concluded, following mediation, constituted protected activity. Ģ��ƵDT dismissed the application as not receivable ratione materiae.

Legal Principle(s)

A staff member must be familiar with the Staff Rules and understand his or her obligation to act in conformance with those rules.

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

Servas

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement