2015-Ģ��ƵAT-523

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred in law in concluding that the imposed disciplinary sanction was disproportionate and consequently substituting it for a lesser one. Ģ��ƵAT held that serious misconduct was established and the disciplinary measure of separation from service without termination indemnity was proportionate. Ģ��ƵAT noted that the misconduct put public health at risk as the food was distributed with altered expiration dates to hide the fact of its expiration. Ģ��ƵAT held that the imposed sanction was neither absurd nor disproportionate and should not have been disturbed by judicial review. Ģ��ƵAT allowed the appeal and vacated the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the proportionality of her sanction for misconduct, namely her separation from service without termination indemnity. Ģ��ƵDT reduced the sanction to separation from service with termination indemnity.

Legal Principle(s)

For disciplinary cases, the role of judicial review is to ascertain whether the facts on which the sanction is based have been established, whether the established facts qualify as misconduct, and whether the sanction is proportionate to the offence.

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

Portillo Moya

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement