2015-Ģ��ƵAT-570

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. Ģ��ƵAT held that resignation results in a break in service, which may, in turn, disqualify a staff member for consideration for a permanent appointment. Ģ��ƵAT held that if a staff member took issue with the requirement for a break in service, he or she should have challenged it at the time by requesting management evaluation. Ģ��ƵAT held that Mr Hajdari never challenged his separation from service from Ģ��ƵMIK or, at any time after his arrival in New York, made any request to human resources to be reinstated at the time. Ģ��ƵAT held that Mr Hajdari��s resignation, in order to take up an appointment in another duty station, effectively constituted a break in service which ended his right to consideration for a permanent appointment. Ģ��ƵAT held that Mr Hajdari��s belief that he was required at the time to resign in order to take up his appointment was irrelevant. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred in remanding the case to the Administration for reconsideration. Ģ��ƵAT upheld the appeal and vacated the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Mr Hajdari contested the decision that he was not eligible for conversion to a permanent appointment due to a 10-day break in service between his assignments with Ģ��ƵMIK and the Ģ��Ƶ Department of Safety and Security. Ģ��ƵDT granted the application and remanded the case to the Administration for consideration of Mr Hajdari��s reinstatement request and a reconsideration of the decision that he was not eligible for conversion to a permanent appointment based on the decision regarding his reinstatement.

Legal Principle(s)

Resignation by a staff member results in a break in service which may, in turn, disqualify a staff member for consideration for a permanent appointment.

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

Hajdari

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement