2015-Ģ��ƵAT-553

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Noting that that the crux of the Appellant��s appeal was that Ģ��ƵDT erred in failing to award him moral damages by reason of the violation of his right to a fair recruitment process and a missed opportunity, Ģ��ƵAT held there was merit to the appeal. Ģ��ƵAT held that there was no evidence that the Appellant��s claim for moral damages was properly considered by Ģ��ƵDT. Ģ��ƵAT held that on the totality of the evidence, the Appellant had a claim for moral damages. Ģ��ƵAT upheld Ģ��ƵDT��s finding that the recruitment process was flawed in that it was affected by the perception of bias. Ģ��ƵAT granted the appeal in part, upheld the Ģ��ƵDT judgment and ordered the payment of moral damages in the sum of two months�� net base salary.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to separate him from service following the abolition of his post and the decision not to select him for a post. Ģ��ƵDT found partly in favour of the Applicant. Ģ��ƵDT rejected the Applicant��s claim concerning the abolition of his post and ensuing separation from service, finding it to be time-barred. Ģ��ƵDT found the selection process was marred by the perception of bias and awarded compensation.

Legal Principle(s)

Damages for a moral injury may arise from a breach of the employee��s substantive entitlements arising from his or her contract of employment and/or from a breach of the procedural due process entitlements therein guaranteed.

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 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

Dia

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement