2017-Ģ��ƵAT-719

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered a request for revision of judgment. Ģ��ƵAT held that Mr Saeed had not presented any new and decisive fact and that therefore his application was without merit. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the application for revision.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Previous Ģ��ƵAT judgment: Mr Saeed contested the decision to approve a new workflow in a division. In judgment No. 2016-Ģ��ƵAT-617, Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal in its entirety, stating that Mr Saeed had not based his appeal on any grounds for appeal set forth in the Ģ��ƵAT Statute. With regard to the approval of the new workflow, Ģ��ƵAT held that even if it were to be considered a decision subject to appeal, the request for decision review was submitted after the expiry of the deadline as correctly pointed out by Ģ��ƵRWA DT.

Legal Principle(s)

The procedure of a revision of judgment is corrective in nature and not an opportunity for an applicant to reargue his case.

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

Saeed

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement