2017-Ģ��ƵAT-734

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT rejected the Appellant��s motion for leave to file additional pleadings on the basis that the Appellant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances. Ģ��ƵAT decided to strike out the Appellant��s additional submission and not to take it into consideration. Ģ��ƵAT found no fault in the Ģ��ƵJSPF Standing Committee��s decision which was in full accord with the Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant was neither entitled to an increase in his pension benefit nor to a retroactive payment for the period of his reemployment as there is no legal basis for retroactive payment of these benefits and that the Standing Committee has no discretion to grant such a retroactive payment. Ģ��ƵAT held that by requested an increase in his pension benefit or retroactive payment of benefits suspending during his reemployment, the Appellant was effectively seeking an amendment to the Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations, noting that only the General Assembly can amend the Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations. Ģ��ƵAT held that there was neither unfairness nor discrimination in the combined application of Article 29(b) or Article 40(a) of the Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations to the Appellant. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Ģ��ƵJSPF Standing Committee.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Previous Ģ��ƵJSPF decision: The Applicant contested the retirement benefit paid to him upon early retirement. He considered the cumulative effect of the application of Article 29(b) and Article 40(a) of the Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations to be discriminatory. The Ģ��ƵJSPF Standing Committee affirmed the Ģ��ƵJSPF decision that the Applicant had not been disadvantaged by the application of the Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations.

Legal Principle(s)

Only the General Assembly can amend Ģ��ƵJSPF Regulations.

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

Witold

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement