2015-Ģ��ƵAT-532

2015-Ģ��ƵAT-532, Dalgaard et al.

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered the motion for execution of judgment No. 2013-Ģ��ƵAT-359. Ģ��ƵAT noted that it had been provided with information from the Secretary-General that all six members of Dalgaard et al. had either resigned, retired or transferred from ICTY prior to the issuance of the impugned decision. In light of this information, Ģ��ƵAT held that none of them could rightfully claim that they were entitled to moral damages as a result of their rights being violated by the impugned decision. Ģ��ƵAT opined that the course of action taken by the Secretary-General, in deciding that Dalgaard et al. were ineligible to be paid the award of damages when there was a Ģ��ƵAT order to the contrary, was unacceptable. Ģ��ƵAT held that it was the Secretary-General��s duty to give proper observance to the order of Ģ��ƵAT. Ģ��ƵAT held there was no merit in the Secretary-General��s case. Ģ��ƵAT held that the members of Dalgaard et al. could not be said to have come to court with clean hands and if they had disclosed the true facts as to their separation, their claim to moral damages would have been found to be without merit. Ģ��ƵAT held that it is the self-evident duty of all counsel appearing before the Tribunals to contribute to the fair administration of justice and the promotion of the rule of law and Ģ��ƵAT held that Counsel for Dalgaard et al. failed in this duty by allowing Ģ��ƵAT to proceed on a factual basis which Counsel should have known to be untrue, resulting in an award of moral damages to which Dalgaard et al. were not entitled. Ģ��ƵAT held that justice in the case would be met if the judgment in favour of Dalgaard et al. were not executed. Ģ��ƵAT refused the Motion for Execution, with Judge Sim��n and Judge Faherty dissenting.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Previous Ģ��ƵAT judgment: In judgment No. 2013-Ģ��ƵAT-359 (Ademagic et al. ), Ģ��ƵAT awarded compensation. Six individuals (Dalgaard et al. ) of the original Ademagic et al. group, filed a motion for execution of the judgment in relation to the payment of non-pecuniary damages with interest.

Legal Principle(s)

It is the Secretary-General��s duty to give proper observance to an order of Ģ��ƵAT and in failing to do so, he puts himself at risk of contempt proceedings. It is a self-evident duty of all counsel appearing before the Tribunals to contribute to the fair administration of justice and the promotion of the rule of law.

Outcome

Revision, correction, interpretation or execution

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

Dalgaard et al.

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement