2018-Ģ��ƵAT-879

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT rejected the Appellant��s request for an oral hearing. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵRWA DT did not commit an error of procedure such as to affect the decision of the case by failing to order the Agency to allow the participation of the Appellant representative in the oral hearing or by failing to accommodate the latter��s employment situation. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵRWA DT did not err on a question of fact, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision when it determined that the Head of Education Department (H/ED) had not received the Appellant��s request for SLWOP and, consequently, that there had not been an administrative decision about this request. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Agency��s decision to separate the Appellant from service for abandonment of post was not reasonable and thus unlawful. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant had not presented any evidence that justified compensation for moral harm. Ģ��ƵAT upheld the appeal partially and modified the Ģ��ƵRWA DT judgment. The decision to separate the Applicant from service was rescinded. Alternatively, Ģ��ƵAT ordered the Commissioner-General to pay in-lieu compensation in the amount of six months�� net base salary. In all other respects, Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵRWA DT judgment affirmed.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Ģ��ƵRWA DT judgment: The Applicant contested the decision to deny his SLWOP request and to terminate his employment due to abandonment of post. Ģ��ƵRWA DT found the request regarding the SLWOP not receivable as no administrative decision had been taken. On the issue of termination, the application was dismissed considering that the decision to terminate the employment by reason of abandonment of post was lawful and correct. Ģ��ƵRWA DT denied the request for moral damages. Ģ��ƵRWA DT dismissed the application in its entirety.

Legal Principle(s)

While a staff member has a right to be represented by another staff member pursuant to Article 8. 3 of the Ģ��ƵRWA DT RoP, the Ģ��ƵRWA DT has wide discretion in matters of case management. Ģ��ƵAT may only award compensation for harm in cases where the staff member has presented evidence other than his own testimony that he or she suffered a moral injury due to the contested administrative decision.

Outcome

Appeal granted in part

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

Nimer

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement