2015-Ģ��ƵAT-555

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that the Secretary-General was duty-bound to implement decisions by the ICSC as directed by the General Assembly and that for the most part, such decisions are of general application and therefore not reviewable. Ģ��ƵAT held, however, that where a decision of general application negatively affects the terms of appointment of a staff member, such decision shall be treated as an ��administrative decision�� within the scope of Article 2. 1 of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute. Based on the staff member��s Personnel Action Forms, before and after implementation of the ICSC��s renumbering exercise, Ģ��ƵAT held that the exercise had a direct adverse impact on her salary. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT failed to give any consideration to the staff member��s Personnel Action Forms and thus erred in law and fact in concluding that her application was not receivable. Ģ��ƵAT upheld the appeal, vacated the Ģ��ƵDT judgment and remanded the matter to Ģ��ƵDT.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The staff member contested the Administration��s decision to implement an ICSC decision which, by lowering the number of GS-levels from nine to seven, had reclassified her post from G-7 to G-6. Ģ��ƵDT found the staff member��s application not receivable since she had failed to challenge an ��appealable administrative decision�� in that the contested decision was made by the ISCS and the Secretary-General had no discretionary authority in proceeding with implementation of the ICSC��s decision. Ģ��ƵDT further found that the contested decision was not taken solely with respect to the staff member, and that she did not establish that the renumbering exercise gave rise to legal consequences that adversely affected her.

Legal Principle(s)

A decision implementing an International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) decision is of general application and therefore not reviewable. However, where a decision of general application negatively affects the terms of appointment of a staff member, such decision shall be treated as an ��appealable administrative decision��.

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

Pedicelli

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement