2015-Ģ��ƵAT-540

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

On the basis that the Appellant did not raise claims under the Ģ��ƵAT Statute, reargued the claims he presented to Ģ��ƵDT and failed to explain how Ģ��ƵDT erred in deciding his claims, Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not make any errors of law or fact in denying the Appellant��s application and concluding that the selection process was correctly followed, the candidate was fully and fairly considered and there was no bias or procedural flaw. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT properly refused to address the Appellant��s various claims of harassment on the ground that he failed to establish proof of harassment against him, or how these allegations might have impacted his non-selection. On discrimination,

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to select him for a post. Ģ��ƵDT rejected his application.

Legal Principle(s)

On appeal, the appellant has the burden to establish that the Ģ��ƵDT judgment is defective.

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

Aliko

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement