2015-罌厭弝ⅰAT-522

罌厭弝ⅰAT Held or 罌厭弝ⅰDT Pronouncements

罌厭弝ⅰAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that there was no reason to reverse the finding of 罌厭弝ⅰDT that a legitimate expectation of a one-year extension was unequivocally created by virtue of the decision taken at the Core Management Group meeting. 罌厭弝ⅰAT affirmed the 罌厭弝ⅰDT decision that Mr Munir had a legitimate expectation and the decision of the Resident Representative not to seek a one-year renewal of his contract was an unlawful exercise of discretion. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the Secretary-General failed to demonstrate that the compensation was unreasonable because there was a basis for the award of compensation of nine months＊ net base pay for the separation from service. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT erred in law and exceeded its jurisdiction in reviewing the additional complaints concerning the conduct of the Resident Representative, matters which had not been part of the Mr. Munir＊s request for management evaluation, and making findings reaching the merits in connection with these matters. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT erred in awarding moral damages. 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that the appeal succeeded in part. 罌厭弝ⅰAT affirmed the 罌厭弝ⅰDT judgment insofar as it related to the issue of non-renewal of Mr Munir＊s appointment and the award of nine months＊ net base pay; set aside part of the 罌厭弝ⅰDT judgment in respect of the placement of Mr Munir on administrative leave and the ensuing investigation, as well as the award in the sum of USD 16,000 as compensation for moral damages.

Accountability referral: 罌厭弝ⅰAT held that 罌厭弝ⅰDT erred in referring the conduct of the Resident Representative to the 罌厭弝ⅰDP Administrator. 罌厭弝ⅰAT set aside the 罌厭弝ⅰDT referral for possible action to enforce accountability.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Mr Munir contested the decision of the Resident Representative not to request an additional one-year extension of his appointment. 罌厭弝ⅰDT found for Mr. Munir, awarded him compensation, and referred the Resident Representative to the Administrator of 罌厭弝ⅰDP for possible action.

Legal Principle(s)

In order for a staff member＊s claim of legitimate expectation of a renewal of appointment to be sustained, it must not be based on mere verbal assertion, but on a firm commitment to renewal revealed by the circumstances of the case. Management evaluation is a mandatory first step in the appeal process.

Outcome

Appeal granted in part

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 罌厭弝ⅰDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 罌厭弝ⅰAT 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

Munir

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement