2017-Ģ��ƵAT-756

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellants had raised neither factual difference nor legal issues different from those canvassed in companion cases and disposed of in judgment No. 2017-Ģ��ƵAT-750 (Kagizi et al. ) and therefore Ģ��ƵAT adopted the reasoning from its prior judgment at paragraphs 18-27. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeals and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgments.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicants contested the decisions not to renew their appointment on grounds of the abolition of their posts. Ģ��ƵDT held that: the Appellant��s challenges to the abolition of their posts were not receivable on the grounds that staff members lacked standing to challenge a decision taken by the General Assembly; the Appellant��s challenges to the non-renewal of their appointments were not receivable in so far as they were properly implemented in consequence of the General Assembly��s decision to abolish their posts; the contested administrative decision taken as a result of the decision of the General Assembly was lawful; the relevant Administrative Instruction was not contravened by the subsequent recruitment of the Appellant��s under Individual Contractor contracts, and no unequal treatment occurred in the implementation of the Mission��s restructuring.

Legal Principle(s)

An administrative decision taken as a result of the General Assembly decision is lawful and the Secretary-General cannot be held accountable for executing such a decision.

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

Nkashama et al.

Entity

Case Number(s)